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.

 keezus wrote:
Contents are unbalanced and meant for scenario play.

So why is this a problem? People bought sedition wars to play scenarios.......

GW doesn't care about organized play, or tournament play. They care about narrative play. I think this point is often lost.

While you are comparing totally unrelated things... why not compare playing with marbles, or super-car racing? How about Yachting?

While Golfing may be out of demographic (though I don't think so, there's plenty of 14-18 year olds near where I live that love to golf), the other examples are hobbies squarely aimed at a similar demographic as 40k.

A bit OT, but considering v6 40k takes huge design cues from v2 40k, shows how forward thinking GW's game design team is. As a joke, I built a space marine (10th Company Captain Kitsch N'Sync, Master of the Armory) from leftover crap in my bits box and glued a ton equipment to it as a direct response to the "moar hobby parts" argument, with emphasis on the never used "grenades, knives and pouches" parts (Pics are WIP. Purity seals yet to be added, and added a strap to the bolter). I was hoping to show that the "moar parts" makes the model look cluttered and silly, and that if the parts are never used, their value added is zero. To my horror, I discovered that while gluing a gak-ton of stuff to a marine makes him look overdone and unbalanced - he also FITS PERFECTLY WITH THE "DRIPPING WITH GEAR AESTHETIC" EXHIBITED BY THE CURRENT RANGE OF SCULPTS!!!









I realize that is neither here-nor-there with regards to pricing players out of the hobby, but as the pricing barrier is related directly to that intangible feeling of "value", I thought I'd post this observation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

 keezus wrote:
Contents are unbalanced and meant for scenario play.

So why is this a problem? People bought sedition wars to play scenarios.......

GW doesn't care about organized play, or tournament play. They care about narrative play. I think this point is often lost.

The point that the starter box is intended for "cinematic / narrative play" isn't stated on the starter box. The scenarios included in the box are also specific to the box. People buy the starter box as a gateway to play the core game, and the starter box does NOT provide the core-game experience, which is what its competitor's starter boxes provide. Can you play the core game? Yes, but not with legal armies, with one side having almost 50% points advantage.

The point that the starter box is intended for "cinematic / narrative play" isn't stated on the starter box.

Nor is what you're calling the 'core game experience' – which I think you're implying is 'match-ups with balanced points'.

The scenarios included in the box are also specific to the box. People buy the starter box as a gateway to play the core game, and the starter box does NOT provide the core-game experience, which is what its competitor's starter boxes provide. Can you play the core game? Yes, but not with legal armies, with one side having almost 50% points advantage.

While the most common (and certainly the most-discussed) way of playing is one on one match-ups with balanced points following the missions in the big rulebook, that's far from the only way of playing or enjoying the game. I'm with cinceydooley on this one – I don't think GW ever have intended their starter kits to be balanced: they care more about them being filled with cool stuff.

True, it provides cool stuff but you can't really split the game between 2 players; the Chaos player is going to lose more often than not unless you're playing the scenarios.

It also doesn't fit in with how most gaming (in club or store is done), which is the 'match-ups with balanced points' approach.

Scenario games are cool and all, but they are pretty hard to get to be fair; avoiding one side having an unfair advantage which quickly starts to spoil the game for the player who sees almost no chance of not getting annihilated by an opponent who has an army almost 50% better according to points. Has anyone seen chaos beat the dark angels in a straight (non-scenario) matchup using all of the minis? I'm genuinely curious as I've never played them, but I can't see it being an easy win at all.

The same isn't really true of PP, where the balance is only 10% out (22 points vs 20), or any other starter set I can think of where the starting teams are more or less equal. I don't think even Black Reach was so out of step.


I appreciate that GW are trying to steer players towards scenario and cinematic games, but they also need to appreciate that players also want balance.

A gripe here....Id like to reject refereing to GW as "the hobby", which implies its the only thing there is in its catagory.

Instead the thread title probably should have been:

Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of their games?

 keezus wrote:
A bit OT, but considering v6 40k takes huge design cues from v2 40k, shows how forward thinking GW's game design team is. As a joke, I built a space marine (10th Company Captain Kitsch N'Sync, Master of the Armory) from leftover crap in my bits box and glued a ton equipment to it as a direct response to the "moar hobby parts" argument, with emphasis on the never used "grenades, knives and pouches" parts (Pics are WIP. Purity seals yet to be added, and added a strap to the bolter). I was hoping to show that the "moar parts" makes the model look cluttered and silly, and that if the parts are never used, their value added is zero. To my horror, I discovered that while gluing a gak-ton of stuff to a marine makes him look overdone and unbalanced - he also FITS PERFECTLY WITH THE "DRIPPING WITH GEAR AESTHETIC" EXHIBITED BY THE CURRENT RANGE OF SCULPTS!!!









I realize that is neither here-nor-there with regards to pricing players out of the hobby, but as the pricing barrier is related directly to that intangible feeling of "value", I thought I'd post this observation.

...
Holy crap. Exalted.

I have to steal this post for next time someone tells me GW sculpts are "better" and "more detailed" just cos they have the most crap stuck to them.

My two cents :

WHFB / WH40K is *ridiculously* expensive for what is just a game. I hesitate to use the words "over-priced," but I'll admit that the words came to mind. If this wasn't true, we wouldn't have 52 pages of discussion.Furthermore, some of the GW products have had a drastic decrease in quality in the last 5 years or so. Some examples:

White Dwarf magazine isn't what it was in the 90's. You'll pay $11 for a 70 page magazine with 50+ pages of advertisements. The battle reports don't really give you any insight into the rules and the "How To" articles are pretty weak now.

Citadel Fine-cast is an abject failure. They cost more than pewter models. They have bubbles and cracks in the casts and they're flimsy resin that breaks easily warps.

The newest line of Citadel paints remain high quality. But they're not as good as the range they're replacing and they still can't compete with Vallejo paint in any respect - quality, price or packaging. Really GW? You go through the whole process of creating a new line of paints and you STILL can't put them in dropper bottles?

However, I like WH40K. I like the fluff. I like the models. I like the books and I like the game and many of their kits have actually improved in quality. For example, how many PP model kits give you enough to build the model from the box AND have left over bits to convert other things? I just bought a box of Thunderwolf Cavalry and magnetized the arms to allow my 3 models to play as any codex legal combination available. And the models are beautiful. Can the privateer press models say the same?

EDIT : With regard to the post right above mine - you dont' have to stick ALL of the bits on the model that came in that box. You use them to kitbash with other kits.

Most importantly though, I'm already invested. I can easily justify $50 per month on a new box of dudes that I don't really need because I already have plenty of mini's to play with. So the pricetag won't stop me from playing. What it does is stops me from building a second or third army.

 Grugknuckle wrote:

The newest line of Citadel paints remain high quality. But they're not as good as the range they're replacing and they still can't compete with Vallejo paint in any respect - quality, price or packaging. Really GW? You go through the whole process of creating a new line of paints and you STILL can't put them in dropper bottles?
.

Really? The only thing you seem to be complaining about is the packaging.

IMO, the pigments in the new GW line are superior to many of the vallejo paints I own, and are certainly more consistent.

And I definitely think they're better than the line they're replacing, especially the bases. The old bases were WAAAAAAY too thick to start off with. But again, to each his own.

As to "the hobby:" GW is one of the few manufactuers that has patrons that seem to be invested in all aspects of "the hobby" and not just limited to playing. Converting is incredibly minimal in other lines as is scratch building. And in even the highest level of other game's tournaments, painting isn't required. Clearly, that doesn't encompass all aspects of 'the hobby.'

 Ugavine wrote:
A basic 1500pt 40K Ork army will cost about £70 ($108) if you're smart about it.

A couple of AOBR Ork sets off eBay (about £25 each) plus a box of Nobz. Bit of conversion to make the second Warboss a Big Mek and a couple of Nobz to Painboyz, One unit of Boyz to be 'Ard Boyz and Deffkoptas with Rokkits and you're pretty much there.

But it's a pointless argument anyway to compare a game designed to have big armies to one designed to have small armies.

And why argue anyway, just play the one you want. Or even better, play both.

These prices aren't even realistic anymore. Black Reach is no longer retail and it's price on ebay has gone up significantly.

@ Grugknuckle: Yes Privateer Press can say the same.

Well, prices for the Demon release are out. Via BoLS:

40K: Codex Chaos Daemons $49.50
WFB: Daemons of Chaos Army Book $49.50
WFB: Chaos Daemons Battalion/Battleforce $115.00
WFB: Burning Chariot of Tzeentch $40.00
WFB: Plague Drones of Nurgle $60.00
WFB: Blood Throne of Khorne $40.00
WFB: Herald of Nurgle $25.00

No shockers and inline with the WoC/DA releases. No greater demons right now, so my prediction of top end of kits being pushed further will have to wait.

I like how the comparisons seem to stay in the realm of fantasy or sci-fi here but one cannot overlook the big surge in historicals in the last few years.

Now from that stand point, both GW and PP are an utter and absolute joke when in comes to pricing.

For example, in historicals for around $100 you can field:

Ancients: 144 28mm Roman Legionnaires (best equivalent in GW - 140 Empire state troops $346.50)
or
Civil War: 176 28mm Civil War Infantry or 56 Civil War Cavalry - Perry Miniatures to boot! (best equivalent in GW 170 Empire State Gunners $420.75 or 56 Rieksguard Knights $245)
or
WWII: 150 28mm Late War American Infantry (best equivalent in GW 150 Cadian Shock Troops $435)

Not to mention with historicals, there are a ton of rule sets available (both full army and skirmish level) so you are not locked into one vendor.

So, as you can see, both as a gamer and a parent I have a very, very hard time swallowing GW pricing now especially when you see it next to historical figures.

As an aside, at my FLGS in the display at the cash register there is a box set of Perry Miniature Civil War Infantry 28mm, 44 plastic figures for $28. Right next to it is a box of Cadian Shock Troops (also sculpted by the Perry twins) 28mm, 10 plastic figures for $29. Please tell me how a parent who didn't know anything about the games understand how a box of 10 "plastic men" is $1 more than the box next to it with more than 4 times the "little plastic men"? Seeing these two together made me realize just how much of a blatant rip-off GW appears (or extreme price gouging, whichever way you want to put it).

I have priced it out and for what one decent sized army in Warhammer or WH40k would cost today, I could field FOUR armies in historicals of equivalent size. Pretty pathetic on GWs part if you ask me.

Because there are plenty of people that have no interest whatsoever in historical wargaming, I suppose.

Also, where are you getting 150 late war WWII Americans in 28mm for $100? Warlord doesn't even come close to touching that price...

Nevermind. It appears Wargames Factory has them now. Thanks!

 cincydooley wrote:

Noir wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Sadly, there aren't any real alternatives to GW at this precise moment.

There's a few coming in the future.

Currently Warpath from Mantic is sort of, kind of, ish, at an early 2nd edition level of game size and rules. - A couple of armies have vehicles, but not many.

There was also Beyond The Gates of Antares, but with the kickstarter cancelled, that is currently in limbo.

Those are really the only two games that I'd say have the potential to be close to the true scale of 40k.

Dust Warfare, baby. With a reactive system, so you don't sit there for 30-60 minutes watching your force die. But the rules for Warpath look pretty soild, got to get a demo of that one.

Dust Warfare is in no way, shape, or form similar to 40k beyond the fact that they both are miniature wargames. From setting to game size, it's not really even close.

Is it a fun game for a great price? Absolutely. But a replacement for someone itching to play a large scale Sci Fi game it is not.

Guess what playing another game requires? Buying into said game, finding someone else that is playing said game, learning said game, and organizing a game so we can stumble through the rules of said game.

Playing 40k requires me to take all th stuff I already own and walk into my LGS on any of about 4 different days of the week.

No for a lagre-scale Sci Fi game you play Epic and Dropzone. 40K is a skirmish game, plan and simple, we know this becouse they have down lagre-scale sci fi before and 40K is not it. Dust is a very close fit, it a skrimish sci fi (yes set in WW2, still sci fi), uses groups of models for units, has vehicles (including legged ones), even heros that make there units better (sure they can only join a group before the game starts). That just the stuff off the top of my head, hell they even both have zombies and apes soldiers.

Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

So what do people realistically consider a good price for a game? And for GW products in particular - Taking into account other hobbies/toys/games on the market (RPGs, Board Games, Train sets, Scalextric, action figures, Computer Consoles, etc.).

I completely agree - there has been a HUGE surge in Historicals and a large exodus away from Fantasy. I personally am part in that statistic. I started playing early on in 5th ed 40K. I loved it and jumped headlong into it pumping every penny of a rather nice tax return into the hobby. I then found that I liked it too little and had a pull toward what? Flames of War. I sold off all my minis and bought into FOW with an almost Ethiopian appetite. I played for many years and then sold all my FOW off as I wanted an escape from the "reality" aspect and got into WHHB, Then hated the rules, sold all that stuff off, bought into WHFB. Played that right as 8th Ed came out, sold one army, sold another, bought back into 40K, hated it all, sold it ALL off AGAIN and bought back into what? You guessed it...Flames of War!

I also, in this FOW kick got into 15mm Napoleonic gaming (land and Naval). Loved it while the butterfly of interest landed there, and as quickly as it had landed, soon alighted and my passions changed. I sold off all my flames and historicals and now have come back full circle to 40K. I just purchased a large IG and Tau army (the Tau have been traded for more IG) with a small Contingent of Marines.

To answer the OP's question - No the price has not tipped me out of the hobby, it has made me look for people out there that ARE fed up with it and looking to get out though. I feel rather like a grave robber that steals the suit off a fresh buried corps and then wears it for a few days before selling it to the fence-men. I like taking old armies and building them, painting them and turning a profit, makes me a tidy bit on the side and I get full enjoyment out of the models for what they are. That way, I get full enjoyment from doing what I love best - the Hobby. I love the painting and building. Then once I have painted to my hearts content, I can sell the minis to someone who has not the time, desire or talent to paint and can make my profit. I have learned that the price is there and has to be paid. It is steep, yes, but every penny of it brings me some small part of happiness as I PUT full effort into the minis.

This is not to say that i would not be just as happy if the price were lower, and I do agree that they are excessive if you are building from the ground up...but there are always fresh graves to be dug up of those too fed up with the prices to carry on. To them, I tip my hat and say "Nice doing business with you"

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

So what do people realistically consider a good price for a game? And for GW products in particular - Taking into account other hobbies/toys/games on the market (RPGs, Board Games, Train sets, Scalextric, action figures, Computer Consoles, etc.).

I've made this point already in the thread, but it's not so much price but VFM that's hurting GW in my eyes. I would happily spend £15 on a single model if it was nice enough. Most of GW's recent efforts haven't been IMO.

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

So what do people realistically consider a good price for a game? And for GW products in particular - Taking into account other hobbies/toys/games on the market (RPGs, Board Games, Train sets, Scalextric, action figures, Computer Consoles, etc.).

See my post three above this one. When compared to historicals, GW pricing looks absolutely ludicrous. Someone new to the hobby who just wants to play with 'guns and tanks' will find WWII much more financially attractive than 40k, which will run you 4 times as much to field an army of equivalent size.

Wayshuba wrote:

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

So what do people realistically consider a good price for a game? And for GW products in particular - Taking into account other hobbies/toys/games on the market (RPGs, Board Games, Train sets, Scalextric, action figures, Computer Consoles, etc.).

See my post three above this one. When compared to historicals, GW pricing looks absolutely ludicrous. Someone new to the hobby who just wants to play with 'guns and tanks' will find WWII much more financially attractive than 40k, which will run you 4 times as much to field an army of equivalent size.

Warlord Games have some great miniatures at excellent prices (not actually played their games yet). Although it would still be a lot cheaper to play a small skirmish game like 7TV.

But the whole noob thing still doesn't hit me as a big argument when you look at the starting prices for other hobbies such as train sets, Scalextric or Computer gaming (the amount of money I see friends spending on computer games dwarfs what what I spend on 40K).

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

Other hobbies is irrelevant, or we could have a billion page thread debating gaming's merits against jogging, stamp collecting or space travel.

Other games? Yes, GW is more expensive than most, if not all (with all things considered). There are some games where the cost per figure is comparable to GW's but they are typically skirmish games that require very few figures. There are some games that require model counts comparable to GW's games, but they are usually much cheaper models. WM/His probably the one system that approaches GW in both aspects, but that's already been well covered in this thread (and I'm not a PP player, so have no interest in the debate).

Anyway, now we've got our models, this is the fun part. GW compounds their trend of 'premium pricing' by trying to add huge costs onto your participation in the hobby. Want the rules? That'll cost you. Lots. Army list for your faction? That's in another book! Paints for all your guys? Why, this handy rack next to the counter! Glue? We recommend our own! Need a battlefield? We sell that too! Trees, rivers, buildings? Yep, we've got you covered, all for more than you'd pay elsewhere!

Now obviously GW want to make as much money as they can, and this is the strategy they want to use. I'm not even suggesting there's anything wrong with the range they carry. Not all of the above is necessary to play the game, either. But their company ethos seems to be to fleece their customers at every available opportunity for every single part of the hobby, and don't dare mention to anyone that any alternative products for any of it exist.

alyxander100 wrote:
I completely agree - there has been a HUGE surge in Historicals and a large exodus away from Fantasy. I personally am part in that statistic. I started playing early on in 5th ed 40K. I loved it and jumped headlong into it pumping every penny of a rather nice tax return into the hobby. I then found that I liked it too little and had a pull toward what? Flames of War. I sold off all my minis and bought into FOW with an almost Ethiopian appetite. I played for many years and then sold all my FOW off as I wanted an escape from the "reality" aspect and got into WHHB, Then hated the rules, sold all that stuff off, bought into WHFB. Played that right as 8th Ed came out, sold one army, sold another, bought back into 40K, hated it all, sold it ALL off AGAIN and bought back into what? You guessed it...Flames of War!

Here's the real problem, right here: serial resellers/rebuyers.

Hold on to your stuff. Then when you have to 'scratch that itch again' you don't have to friggin rebuy everything.

Yeeesh.

 Grugknuckle wrote:
EDIT : With regard to the post right above mine - you dont' have to stick ALL of the bits on the model that came in that box. You use them to kitbash with other kits.

I think everyone realizes that you don't have to stick ALL the bits on the model. The model was intended as a tounge-in-cheek counter point that GW product offers more value over their competitors due to inclusion of more bits for customising your models that don't get used. (Emphasis mine). They then conclude, that GW's pricing model is reasonable due to "moar hobby stuff".

Every marine player I know has a million copies of the purity seals, knives, holsters and grenade bits because they are generally oversized and silly looking. Especially the purity seals. No matter how you glue them to the model, if you don't shave down the back, they project comically off the body. For the shooting pose space marine, you can hardly fit the pouches into logical positions on the model's waist due to the position of the arms holding the bolter and if you attach them to the shoulders or the legs, they look like they are running around the battlefield with a piece of luggage strapped to their body. Just having something included doesn't mean it is value added. If I marketed a TV which offered a 1D mode in addition to the standard 2D and 3D modes, it wouldn't be value added, because nobody uses that mode.

I'm almost done construction of the model and I'll post final pics soon.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Grugknuckle wrote:

The newest line of Citadel paints remain high quality. But they're not as good as the range they're replacing and they still can't compete with Vallejo paint in any respect - quality, price or packaging. Really GW? You go through the whole process of creating a new line of paints and you STILL can't put them in dropper bottles?
.

Really? The only thing you seem to be complaining about is the packaging.

IMO, the pigments in the new GW line are superior to many of the vallejo paints I own, and are certainly more consistent.

And I definitely think they're better than the line they're replacing, especially the bases. The old bases were WAAAAAAY too thick to start off with. But again, to each his own.

As to "the hobby:" GW is one of the few manufactuers that has patrons that seem to be invested in all aspects of "the hobby" and not just limited to playing. Converting is incredibly minimal in other lines as is scratch building. And in even the highest level of other game's tournaments, painting isn't required. Clearly, that doesn't encompass all aspects of 'the hobby.'

The new GW paints are high quality in the sense that they are consistent. However, their range of colors is more limited than their old range, in the sense that they have fewer bright colors. For example, squid pink, sunburst yellow and scorpion green were all much brighter than the new "equivalents". Since it is much easier to darken a color by mixing it than to brighten a color, I prefer the old range. Really, it seems like the new range was designed entirely to cater to GW codex color schemes. If you want a full range of colors, you're better off with Vallejo (especially for airbrush) or privateer press. Furthermore, GW paints run about 25 cents per milliliter, while Vallejo costs about 16-17 cents a milliliter. So you're paying more too.

The new layer paints are good, but in my opinion they're too transparent. I prefer a more opaque color (but that's just me). I'll agree that the base range is at least as good as the old, frankly I want that thicker paint so that I can thin it to what I need. If you give me pre-thinned paint (like the layer paint) you're actually charging me the same $ for less pigment and more acrylic medium. I like the "shades" and "glazes" very much actually. But I feel that the "dry" and "texture" range are a complete waste of money. If you want texture, you can do it much cheaper by just painting over sand, or mixing sand into your paint.

As for the packaging; while I can still spray layer paints through my airbrush it is both messy and wasteful when you have pots. Dropper bottles are superior for measuring and for loading an airbrush.

As you said - each to his own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

Because there are plenty of people that have no interest whatsoever in historical wargaming, I suppose.

To be fair, there are just as many (or more) who have no interest in Sci-Fi or Fantasy wargaming. They just tend to be older, and you probably won't see them at your FLGS.

Riquende wrote:

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

Other hobbies is irrelevant, or we could have a billion page thread debating gaming's merits against jogging, stamp collecting or space travel.

Other hobbies would be irrelevant if others in the argument didn't keep comparing 40K against wargames that use fewer models.
GW games are designed to use more models, yes I'm aware that, that is a marketing plan to get players to buy more - I did a year on marketing at college.

Other games? Yes, GW is more expensive than most, if not all (with all things considered). There are some games where the cost per figure is comparable to GW's but they are typically skirmish games that require very few figures. There are some games that require model counts comparable to GW's games, but they are usually much cheaper models. WM/His probably the one system that approaches GW in both aspects, but that's already been well covered in this thread (and I'm not a PP player, so have no interest in the debate).

GW prices, model for model, are around the same price as those others, mostly costing a fraction more. But it is just that, a fraction more and GW models generally come with a lot more options from their kit.

Anyway, now we've got our models, this is the fun part. GW compounds their trend of 'premium pricing' by trying to add huge costs onto your participation in the hobby. Want the rules? That'll cost you. Lots. Army list for your faction? That's in another book! Paints for all your guys? Why, this handy rack next to the counter! Glue? We recommend our own! Need a battlefield? We sell that too! Trees, rivers, buildings? Yep, we've got you covered, all for more than you'd pay elsewhere!

Now obviously GW want to make as much money as they can, and this is the strategy they want to use. I'm not even suggesting there's anything wrong with the range they carry. Not all of the above is necessary to play the game, either. But their company ethos seems to be to fleece their customers at every available opportunity for every single part of the hobby, and don't dare mention to anyone that any alternative products for any of it exist.

Maybe it's that I've studied marketing that makes me numb to it. I only buy what I want. I buy my Primer from Model Zone and I really like PP paints. I buy what I like be it GW, Warlord Games, Crooked Dice or whatever.

Sure GW go on about only their own products. Why shouldn't they? Do PP or the other companies ever suggest buying from GW?

 keezus wrote:

 Grugknuckle wrote:
EDIT : With regard to the post right above mine - you dont' have to stick ALL of the bits on the model that came in that box. You use them to kitbash with other kits.

I think everyone realizes that you don't have to stick ALL the bits on the model. The model was intended as a tounge-in-cheek counter point that GW product offers more value over their competitors due to inclusion of more bits for customising your models that don't get used. (Emphasis mine). They then conclude, that GW's pricing model is reasonable due to "moar hobby stuff".

I'm not saying that GW's pricing is reasonable. Quite the opposite. What I'm saying is that GW models (for the most part) are high quality. The plastic kits in particular are really well cast. Sure, I have enough un-used bits to sink a ship (all those wolf tails, space wolf heads and plasma pistols) and of course I'm not going to use them all. But hear me out - Isn't it nice that the space marines are plastic and you can pose them how you want? Or convert them how you want? It used to be that all of the mini's were lead and you could only have one pose or wargear option. Do other miniature companies offer you the same? I don't think so.

I have a TON of FOW stuff and I like it - the models are fine for what I'm doing with them. But the "quality" of those resin cast tanks and pewter nazis is very poor compared to an average GW plastic mini. And they aren't much cheaper either. One Tiger IE tank costs like $15 and is likely to have a bubble in the cast and a boat load of flash. Compare that to say the Chaos Space Marine Aspiring Champion plastic kit (not fine cast) which is about $20. It costs more, but it's also a cleaner cast.

 Grugknuckle wrote:

 keezus wrote:

 Grugknuckle wrote:
EDIT : With regard to the post right above mine - you dont' have to stick ALL of the bits on the model that came in that box. You use them to kitbash with other kits.

I think everyone realizes that you don't have to stick ALL the bits on the model. The model was intended as a tounge-in-cheek counter point that GW product offers more value over their competitors due to inclusion of more bits for customising your models that don't get used. (Emphasis mine). They then conclude, that GW's pricing model is reasonable due to "moar hobby stuff".

I'm not saying that GW's pricing is reasonable. Quite the opposite. What I'm saying is that GW models (for the most part) are high quality. The plastic kits in particular are really well cast. Sure, I have enough un-used bits to sink a ship (all those wolf tails, space wolf heads and plasma pistols) and of course I'm not going to use them all. But hear me out - Isn't it nice that the space marines are plastic and you can pose them how you want? Or convert them how you want? It used to be that all of the mini's were lead and you could only have one pose or wargear option. Do other miniature companies offer you the same? I don't think so.

Hi. To answer your questions directly:

1. I agree that posability is nice. However, IMHO, in order to facilitate posability, GW kits are modular by design. However, the freedom of posing, while limitless, -is- limited by the fact that only a fixed number of poses and combinations look natural. Finally (and this is subjective), a multi-part posable piece generally never reaches the same aesthetic (profile and pose) than a dedicated one pose cast (metal, plastic or resin).

2. IMHO, kit-bashing != converting. GW has deliberately blurred the lines here to make the hobby more accessible - These days, White Dwarf considers head swaps and weapon swaps conversions. Converting, in my mind means that parts need to be adapted in some way be it cutting, joining or sculpting in order to change their base form. Kit bashing involves just gluing together parts from multiple kits without any modifications. The "moar" hobby model that I made is largely a kitbash, but I'd consider it to be a conversion as the chainsword arm needed to be cut and reposed to fit the bolter and a new armpit was sculpted and a plasticard lanyard was added for the bolter (not shown).

3. Personal preference only, IMHO, the old metal models have better character than the new multipart plastic characters. Compare a guy like the old maligned Captain Tycho to the new multipart Captain. Sure the captain has more options, but he's mostly stuck in a half-charging waving his weapons around pose. The cape severely limits torso rotation, where as Tycho is standing there, hands on his hips... like a BAWS. The model doesn't have to be metal necessarily, as I feel that new one-pose plastic Fantasy characters typically have superior posing as you don't have to worry about modular requirements of multi-pose. Even the Black Reach captain is superior to the multipart marine captain. He's got bling, but not the bling explosion the DV characters have. IMO, the Empire Wizard is a good compromise between customization and design and is one of GW's best multipart kits. The marine kit, which dates back to V3 is terribly primitive in comparision.

I am not one to sugar coat anything. By in large, I rate GW's casts are a 9/10. Details are usually well cast. Mould lines are plentiful, but easily removed. The kits still suffer infrequent mold slip. In comparison, I'd consider Malifaux's plastic as a 8/10. Details are crisp, mould line removal a bit more of a pain. PP's plastics only rate 6/10. Detail is mediocre, but mouldline removal is a nightmare. PP's resins are nice and sharp but I've had lots of problems with bubbles, and mould slips on their Colossal kits, which is frankly, really disapointing considering their size AND PRICE. No problems reported in their metal/resin hybrids of older kits, and minor problems only with the resin battle engines.

Wayshuba wrote:

 Ugavine wrote:
Okay, I'm still not buying into GW being as overly expensive as some are making out. Expensive, yes. But that more expensive as other games & hobbies, not really.

So what do people realistically consider a good price for a game? And for GW products in particular - Taking into account other hobbies/toys/games on the market (RPGs, Board Games, Train sets, Scalextric, action figures, Computer Consoles, etc.).

See my post three above this one. When compared to historicals, GW pricing looks absolutely ludicrous. Someone new to the hobby who just wants to play with 'guns and tanks' will find WWII much more financially attractive than 40k, which will run you 4 times as much to field an army of equivalent size.

Difference is that the price you pay for GW products does not only cover the manufacturing and material costs (15-20% of retail) and a profit. The lion share of the money you pay is upkeep for their hobby-store system, it's staff and the company organization(40-50%). Most other games don't have such elaborate (read: expensive) retail distribution systems. It's all in their annual reports.

The stores really are the key to GW's market position over the last 20 years. It's a recruitment tool for new victims/customers. The average player will only spend heavily on a game in the first few years so they need a constant supply of new blood. And it's needed given their less then optimal business practices. The only similar company (and price tag) I can think of is Wizards of the Coast with their 'Magic the Gathering' card game.


If seen purely as miniatures and model kits then I agree it's silly expensive. My primary hobby is model building and some companies in that industry are light years ahead in terms of engineering and design compared to what GW puts out at a fraction of the cost.

 Ugavine wrote:

Other hobbies would be irrelevant if others in the argument didn't keep comparing 40K against wargames that use fewer models.

No matter the scale of wargame, we can make broad comparisons over:

Average 'per model' cost
Cost of average army to play
Cost of gaming ancillaries (rulebooks being the most obvious)

How that relates to Scalextric I don't know, nor care.

GW games are designed to use more models, yes I'm aware that, that is a marketing plan to get players to buy more - I did a year on marketing at college.

Okay, so? It doesn't change the fact it's expensive, which was the point. I don't need to know why they want to charge me twice the price of other manufacturers for (IMO) worse product. Your defence of the statement "GW being .. more expensive as other games ... not really." is to say "yes they're more expensive, that's their marketing plan" needs some work.

GW prices, model for model, are around the same price as those others, mostly costing a fraction more. But it is just that, a fraction more and GW models generally come with a lot more options from their kit.

We obviously shop in different places, for very different types of miniatures.

Oh, and not all games include 'wargear options' so don't actually need to have lots of options included (this is a plus or minus depending on point of view, before leaving GW behind I'd have said it was a big minus but to be honest I don't miss it).

Maybe it's that I've studied marketing that makes me numb to it. I only buy what I want. I buy my Primer from Model Zone and I really like PP paints. I buy what I like be it GW, Warlord Games, Crooked Dice or whatever.

Sure GW go on about only their own products. Why shouldn't they? Do PP or the other companies ever suggest buying from GW?

As I said, they're welcome to implement whatever sales/marketing strategy they want. I don't expect them to suggest people buy from anywhere else at all. It just reveals their overall attitude to the sort of customers they want in their shoos, who have deep pockets and no idea about the wider variety of the wargaming hobby.

However, the main part of that (which did get a little lost as I kept typing) was that in addition to all these 'fractionally more expensive' figures, you're required to buy a big, expensive rulebook, and a big, expensive army book to play.

Anyway, the real answer to the OP's question is: Yes (as long as you mean the GW hobby), for an increasing number of people; but no for an undefined number of people that is probably stagnant (dwindling veterans plus hobby-newbies). If you, personally, have no problem paying those prices and have a group of players with a similar outlook then by all means keep spending the money if you're finding value in the models. Accept that there are other people who don't see any value in GW's product and move on, you don't need to mount a staunch defence of the pricing structure, the 'bitz' included in the kits or anything like that - if it works for you, that should be enough.

Nucflash wrote:

If you like the Lore/fluff of the universe I recomend you get into Fantasy flights RPG line of games instead, Dark Herasy, Deathwatch etc. You have to find a few friends to do it with, but its so much more fun if you want to explore the universe of 40k. And the Roleplaying games do not need the same level of balance as table top game to be fun. Also when reading your post you look to be among the few dedicated people who actually likes to paint armies .. welcome to the minority.

But the more you will play the game the more frustrated you will become. Sorry this is the truth about the GW part of the hobby...
.

That's the minority? ...I feel weird now, I don't even like to play an army unless it's fully painted.... ^^;

 Grugknuckle wrote:
It used to be that all of the mini's were lead and you could only have one pose or wargear option. Do other miniature companies offer you the same? I don't think so.

You know - you can actually repose metal and resin too, don't you? Believe it or not - lots of people do do that.

Riquende wrote:

 Ugavine wrote:

Other hobbies would be irrelevant if others in the argument didn't keep comparing 40K against wargames that use fewer models.

No matter the scale of wargame, we can make broad comparisons over:

Average 'per model' cost
Cost of average army to play
Cost of gaming ancillaries (rulebooks being the most obvious)

.

Name me one game that I can compared (number of models, the kind of models they use like troop, tanks, flyers, rules they share and strategies) to 40K or WHFB.

If you comparing only on the money value of the game, every other games cost less but every core books are not cheap.

If you compare games like Infinity, Warmahorde or Flame of War, I give you that but you cannot compare 40k and Infinity. They are not the same game.