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.

 Lockark wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

D&D 4th is the only sore point for them in regards to their player base. 4th ed D&D is a great rpg. The problem is it's not a D&D game. They have even said that was their biggeat mistake when makeing it.

Please, that's only just to please that angry grognards. 3E and 3.5E is drastic enough that people hated it from 2E, and to many of them it wouldn't be DND, to first edition players it would be a tragic hilarity that people called 2E a dnd game at all, It's as much DnD as the rest, calling it something else is just something to placate the grognards.

As it is, Hasbro still would do better then GW as it comes down to what works.

Hasbro has had bad times, and good times...GW can't seem to find anything good lately.

I acctully realy like 4th ed, sadly in some gameing circules that will bassicly get you lynched. lol

But you still can't ignore the back-lash that 4th ed caused, and how Pathfinder came and picked up a huge part of the D&D player base. But the big diffrence between GW and Hasbro is how they are handleing the issues.

Hasbro: Aw shoot we just lost a huge chunk of the player base! We need to generate more sales of product with FLGS programs like D&D encounters! Still isn't working? Let's write a new edition to adress the issues players are haveing with our game.

GW: Profits are down! Quick! Time to raise prices and force more core product into direct sales only so we make a bigger profit margin! People didn't like out 6th ed supplements! We need 7th ed to FORCE people to use them!

I have said it before, I will say it again - 4e did not need to be a replacement product for D&D.

Had they called it D&D Tactics, or the like - and run it in parallel with D&D (3.x architecture) then there would have been room for both systems.

WotC tried to force 4e as a replacement, ignored playtesters, then insulted their fanbase... and were left wondering why 4e was not doing as well as they had hoped.

Add to this the fact that they outright lied about 4e being in the works, and the horror that was the GSL.

The difference between WotC and GW - WotC has admitted that they screwed up. They have admitted that they pissed off their old fanbase when trying to grab new marketshare.

Then they stole a page from the playbook of the company that replaced them as the #1 RPG - and had a public playtest, letting folks know that their feedback was being used, and giving fair warning that a new edition was again on the horizon.

GW gave how much notice that 7th edition WH40K was coming out? Less than a month?

Even 4e D&D had more notice than that.

Hasbro makes mistakes, learns from them, and moves on.

GW makes mistakes, makes new mistakes to get rid of the old mistakes, then makes even more mistakes to replace those mistakes....

And the white knights come out to defend the company that makes crappy rules against the folks that are fed up with getting crappy rules.

It is going on two years since last I bought a GW product.

The last GW product that I got was terrain - that I do not use with a GW game. I use it with Kings of War. (Well... a correction there - I also use the terrain with Mordheim, which used to be a GW game. (And still should be, dammit!))

Now, do not get me wrong - I think that 6e WH40K lost GW a lot of sales. They kind of need to make 7e... and I hope that 7e makes the changes needed to help the game regain marketshare.

But I doubt that I will be interested in the game, and my hopes that it actually fixes the problems are low.

The Auld Grump

 Lockark wrote:

Also yes the My little pony reboot is amazing. Thow thats a case of a perfect storm of talent comeing together. I'm not 100% sure how much of a hand hasbro had in makeing that happen.

Hasbro gave a woman who knew what she was doing a lot of creative control and left her to gather that perfect storm of talent and the result, even ignoring the entire internet side of it with bronies and all that, is still a massively popular show that no one expected.

Pretty much all of its success came down to Hasbro letting the creator do what she wanted and that is exactly why I want Hasbro to get their hands on the 40k IP.
They are good at putting their products in the hands of the right people then leaving it alone so long as those people are making money off it.

Just imagine how great 40k could be if the accountants and lawyers infesting the studio where gone and the 'old guard' guys could replace them with people enthusiastic about the hobby with complete creative freedom.

 Lockark wrote:

Also yes the My little pony reboot is amazing. Thow thats a case of a perfect storm of talent comeing together. I'm not 100% sure how much of a hand hasbro had in makeing that happen.

If anything Hasbro gets in the way with constantly dictating "X toy line must feature in the show", "lead character must now be a princess", "lets make a spin-off where they turn into humans go to high school and have crushes"... etc. etc.

It's a credit to the skill of people making the show that they've managed to meet the requirements of all of Hasbro's crappy demands and keep the show good despite it.

In the season finale which aired yesterday, a new crystal castle treehouse (clear "Hasbro wants to sell this toy" thing) was added. Looks really ugly, but the writers took the boardroom demand and used it as an excuse to destroy the main characters previous treehouse home and have all her books burnt to a crisp... an episode two weeks prior focused on her realizing how much sentimental value they had to her, so it was setup for a real gut-punch moment when they all burn.

Here's an image that maybe shows it off better, definitely an extremely good creative team, rather than any credit going to Hasbro's board-room, if anything their contribution is a negative one.:

[Pony gak ends here ]

Anyway, in short, I'm very familar with how Hasbro rolls, and they would meddle, rather a lot, probably changing some of the more "child unfriendly" background for American audiences.. it would be as jarring as the jump from grimdark rogue trader to candy pop primary colours 2nd edition 40k, something which 40k background still hasn't recovered from, IMO.

They would run TV ads though and make more board games, so it would increase in popularity.. might lose some of the charm it currently has.

The current creative team and management are mostly leaving the background alone while wrecking the rules/ balance/ everything for sales purposes.

Hasbro ownership might result in better rules and a better game and more specialist/ board games, but with a butchered background in places, or, more likely the introduction of completely new and stupid ideas that don't fit the setting at all.

I don't have faith in the current 40k creative/ writing team to be able to take whatever a Hasbro board-room can throw at them without messing up the background, there isn't the passion for a quality product in that design studio as it currently stands. Anyone with passion and talent got fired a long time ago for not fitting in (and are now doing just fine outside of GW, see Blizzard, Warlord, Mantic etc.) , all that's left is subservient mediocrity.

Hasbro ownership might result in better rules and a better game and more specialist/ board games, but with a butchered background in places, or, more likely the introduction of completely new and stupid ideas that don't fit the setting at all.

That depends, they don't butcher WOTC's MTG cards despite some of them being rather horrific.

Different audience though, from Hasbro's perspective, purchasing GW would be purchasing a boys' toys company and board-room decisions would focus on the 7-12 year old market... or more accurately, what they think the 7-12 year old boys market wants, despite not having much of a clue.

Stuff like pre-paints and blindbox buying could possibly happen.

Commercially good decisions, but it would mark a definite shift to a more toylike line.

Then again, I think GW of recent years has been doing quite a lot of that anyway, the focus on giant models is basically action figures for rich kids.

I said it before I'll say it again. GW DOES think its selling toys to kids. They have said as much.

Hasbro however knows the importance of market research.

Additionally, I'm sure that Hasbro would take into account the value and demographic of long term customers. Young boys are great for a quick pump-and-dump, but I'd imagine mature consumers provide a good, steady flow of income that is important during non-peak times.

Ill be honest its difficult to say if that is a smart move or not.

If Hasbro keeps the current designers and model makers on board I think it could be amazing. But at the moment I don't think Hasbro knows the hobby well enough to take it on.

I think Hasbro will be excellent at fixing the current prices, getting younger generation into the game, and providing more content. But I think they will destroy the overall game unless they keep it in the hands of those who know it.

There focus is no young kids 12 and under, so they will introduce new ideas to pull them in and older generations like us will most likely hate. An in the long term, killing it.

zombie_sky_diver wrote:
Their focus is on young kids 12 and under, so they will introduce new ideas to pull them in and older generations like us will most likely hate. An in the long term, killing it.

So, no change from GW, then?

When I was 12 years old I was playing Avalon Hill wargames, System 7 Napoleonics, and Chainmail.... And thought that Legos were the best toys ever.

The Auld Grump, some things don't change.

Cannot resist weighing in on a 4th debate. I think it was an alright game, but not a good successor to the DnD title. There, I said it. One can see the logical progression from basic to AD&D to 3.0 to 3.5 then abruptly 4E comes out of nowhere. I didn't mind it but I find Pathfinder superior. And the sales figures speak for themselves.

Anyway, Hasbro. I don't think Hasbro would be any worse or better for 40k and fantasy. While Hasbro is bound to make better business decisions than GW and go over to basing prices off the US dollar so prices make sense the world over, (the pound's monopoly on miniature wargaming sales annoys me) the world will lose some of that dark british humor that makes them distinct from other sci fi anf fantasy universes (and this is coming from someone who hates grim dark usually). However, if GW flops I think hasbro will probably snap up the warhammer licences, because they have been slowly assimilating all aspects of geek culture.

 EmilCrane wrote:
Cannot resist weighing in on a 4th debate. I think it was an alright game, but not a good successor to the DnD title. There, I said it. One can see the logical progression from basic to AD&D to 3.0 to 3.5 then abruptly 4E comes out of nowhere. I didn't mind it but I find Pathfinder superior. And the sales figures speak for themselves.

Anyway, Hasbro. I don't think Hasbro would be any worse or better for 40k and fantasy. While Hasbro is bound to make better business decisions than GW and go over to basing prices off the US dollar so prices make sense the world over, (the pound's monopoly on miniature wargaming sales annoys me) the world will lose some of that dark british humor that makes them distinct from other sci fi anf fantasy universes (and this is coming from someone who hates grim dark usually). However, if GW flops I think hasbro will probably snap up the warhammer licences, because they have been slowly assimilating all aspects of geek culture.

Up until that horrid Essentials line 4E still overtook Pathfinder, once Essentials came, which were more...attuned to former DnD and kinda crapped on 4E, sales dropped and they lost the market share.

NO. THESE POLL QUESTIONS ARE AWFUL.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 EmilCrane wrote:
Cannot resist weighing in on a 4th debate. I think it was an alright game, but not a good successor to the DnD title. There, I said it. One can see the logical progression from basic to AD&D to 3.0 to 3.5 then abruptly 4E comes out of nowhere. I didn't mind it but I find Pathfinder superior. And the sales figures speak for themselves.

Anyway, Hasbro. I don't think Hasbro would be any worse or better for 40k and fantasy. While Hasbro is bound to make better business decisions than GW and go over to basing prices off the US dollar so prices make sense the world over, (the pound's monopoly on miniature wargaming sales annoys me) the world will lose some of that dark british humor that makes them distinct from other sci fi anf fantasy universes (and this is coming from someone who hates grim dark usually). However, if GW flops I think hasbro will probably snap up the warhammer licences, because they have been slowly assimilating all aspects of geek culture.

Up until that horrid Essentials line 4E still overtook Pathfinder, once Essentials came, which were more...attuned to former DnD and kinda crapped on 4E, sales dropped and they lost the market share.

True, but DnD in any form losing its market share at all still speaks for itself, doesn't matter how it happened, they dropped the ball with 4E and Paizo overtook them. Those are the facts.

I think Hasbro would do just fine with the franchise, but I'd rather that they didn't.

 EmilCrane wrote:
Cannot resist weighing in on a 4th debate. I think it was an alright game, but not a good successor to the DnD title. There, I said it. One can see the logical progression from basic to AD&D to 3.0 to 3.5 then abruptly 4E comes out of nowhere. I didn't mind it but I find Pathfinder superior. And the sales figures speak for themselves.

Anyway, Hasbro. I don't think Hasbro would be any worse or better for 40k and fantasy. While Hasbro is bound to make better business decisions than GW and go over to basing prices off the US dollar so prices make sense the world over, (the pound's monopoly on miniature wargaming sales annoys me) the world will lose some of that dark british humor that makes them distinct from other sci fi anf fantasy universes (and this is coming from someone who hates grim dark usually). However, if GW flops I think hasbro will probably snap up the warhammer licences, because they have been slowly assimilating all aspects of geek culture.

Well this is in my sphere of influence so I know some certain other aspects on 4th ED. Long story Short. The licensing of 4th Ed was unacceptable to several 3rd party companies that gave strong support to 3.5 previously.

The customer base also did not want 4th ED. And what did you know Pathfinder was born. It is kind of nice to be able to talk to game designers of certain games and get their honest opinion on what is happening to the gaming industry of today.

And though my NDA agreements are done I enjoy having my contacts in how things are created, produced, marketed (still have friends in a major ad firm for the far east), and distributed.

What is selling is the continued trend that you have been seeing since 2007. Board games are up. Card games are up. Miniature games are more or less up. Games Workshop? heh,....

My previous still stands as well as the following. The illusion of how big Games Workshop is is just that. An illusion in my eyes. I do not believe that they are that strong globally as they have been restructuring for the past 4 years in a downward trend. They had their chance but I believe they blew it to be something special.

It would not surprise me one bit in the near future is England will be their last stronghold left. The rest of the world will have to get their product online or through a few distributors.

I do not think they (Hasbro) wants to deal with an IP such as Games Workshop.

48% of responses say yes and only 26% say no. Interesting results.

I think that the results are very remarkable. GW is widely reviled on these forums and yet only 48% want GW to be bought out by Hasbro. This does not speak highly of our regard for Hasbro.

I think it would be best if the GW IP died. People could still play the games and use the models, but would not be beholden to a company that is seeking to make money off of them.

Feth no. GW for all its faults is a unique and original company who has created down the years unique IP and given me some awesome memories. Sure I hate the power creep and badly playtested rules but I was playing second edition till 6th was released
For all their problems we get miniatures at fairly industry standard rates (as far as I am aware) and they do try new stuff all the times...they need money and can understand where their crazy decisions originate from and hope that they learn from it. im hoping it swings back without a large company coming in and keeper of secret's it to death. and going back to rogue trader...it's your game!! don't like something change it with your mates. Drink more beer. Write up your own strategy cards or something. I do miss the days of fricking make your own scenery in WD though..

 spaceelf wrote:
I think that the results are very remarkable. GW is widely reviled on these forums and yet only 48% want GW to be bought out by Hasbro. This does not speak highly of our regard for Hasbro.

I think it would be best if the GW IP died. People could still play the games and use the models, but would not be beholden to a company that is seeking to make money off of them.

On the contrary, 48% is amazingly substantial. Note that 48% want it to happen. 26% don't care, which is as good for Hasbro as wanting it to happen, and only 26%, one quarter of responses, don't want it to happen.

That's much, much higher than I thought it would be. Those results demonstrate that, at least as far as DakkaDakka is concerned, wanting Hasbro buy out GW is not some sort of minority opinion.

Hasbro would be a disaster.

Just because Hasbro managed to somehow not screw up a single game (MTG) doesn't change the long trail of corpses they've left behind them. Hasbro does make good games, and can manage IP well, but it only makes certain kinds of games well, and it only does a good job with some IP.

Hasbro can handle anything mainstream with relative success. Anything that one could imagine being plugged into the Disney fold (there are obvious reasons why the two companies work together) is something they can handle. But they don't do weird, they don't do complex, and they don't do hobby. If they got their hands on it, 40k would turn into an action-figure monopoly rip-off.

It would become a toy, not a game.

They could hand it over to WoC, of course, but they don't have a great track record outside of their one flagship product either. Or worse, of course, they turn 40k into MTG, and all of those things people hate about 40k will only get accelerated to crazy new levels. MTG works because its a card game. As a tabletop miniature wargame it would be a disaster.

If, for whatever reason, GW had to sell off, I'd hope it goes to Fantasy Flight. Yes, yes, they have their own wonkiness (you thought 40k had a lot of pieces before!), but at least they're not afraid to tackle complicated games and let weird things stay weird. They also have a history of handling 40k's IP in a decent fashion.

The last time there was a thread about Hasbro buying GW, I (rather vociferously-- my apologies) pointed out that GW doesn't fit the criteria for the type of companies Hasbro buys.

1) Hasbro buys success. They bought WotC for ccgs and have purchased some breakout hit boardgame companies, but I don't think they've ever swooped in on a flailing company and bought them out.
2) Hasbro doesn't need GW's injection moulding infrastructure as their toy manufacturing infrastructure is already much, much larger and more developed.
3) Hasbro doesn't need GW's retail stores. They are committed to working with existing toy retailers and when they did end up with some WotC company stores, they closed them pretty quickly.
4) Hasbro doesn't need GW's trade sales contacts. They are already in every comic and gaming shop because of Magic: The Gathering and they already work with every distributor.

So while I would love someone as aware of what gamers want as Mark Rosewater in charge of 40k, I don't think it's going to happen. I understand GW made some contact with Hasbro and their most recently added board member is a specialist in mergers and acquisitions, but I think getting Hasbro to bite is a herculean task.

Frozen, I agree with you on all points. However, GW has an asset in the IP that could be worth the value of the company.

I'm not saying Hasbro wants to buy GW for its IP, but that would be an understandable reason to acquire the company. Hasbro may have been interested in a license, but GW isn't giving up a license to Hasbro for a reasonable rate or terms. Hasbro would have to buy the company.

 scarletsquig wrote:
Here's an image that maybe shows it off better, definitely an extremely good creative team, rather than any credit going to Hasbro's board-room, if anything their contribution is a negative one.

Creative team hired by...?

Hasbro isn't a NGO. They're here to sell toys. But they hire good writers, and they still give them some freedom, even when trying to push sales.

I don't know if Cruddace and Ward are poor writers, have way too much constraints, or both. I don't know if they should be given more freedom or if they should be sacked. And frankly, I don't care : I'm a customer, not a GW executive.

I only see poor overpriced products that I don't really want to buy.

Another interesting aspect is the relationship to customers. Hasbro is not interfering much with the community or the way authors interact with the community. They do remove some videos from Youtube from time to time, and they didn't give the authorization to use their IP in some projects (Fighting is Magic comes to mind), which is disappointing, but it's miles away from GW's attitude. ***cough*** Spots the Space Marine.

Mind you, we're talking about a toy company that chose to look elsewhere when people make and sell My Little Pony plushes.

Mind you, we're talking about a toy company that chose to look elsewhere when people make and sell My Little Pony plushes.

The only time they've stepped in is when something gets too big as well, such as Fighting is Magic being presented at EVO.

 Ugavine wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ugavine wrote:
Hasbro does NOT know the gaming industry, they only know the family gaming industry, which is what they do well.

Yeah, they clearly don't know gaming, which is why MTG is such a hopeless failure.

As for their other games:

The Star Wars games died because of license issues, not WOTC's decisions. IIRC the games were successful, but when the license was up for renewal the new terms were financial suicide.

D&D had problems with 4th edition, but WOTC is at least attempting to fix those problems based on player feedback, something GW refuses to do. And note that one of the biggest problems WOTC has with D&D is their incredibly generous license terms (essentially "use the core rules in your products for free, just put a D20 logo on the cover") for the 3rd edition rules, which allowed a competing company to make D&D in all but name.

D&D miniatures (and their other minor games) suffered from the problem of not having any realistic market, something GW's IP doesn't have a problem with.

They gave up Star Wars because they ran out of ideas! Seriously, a role-playing company that ran out of ideas? With Star Wars?!

They didnt renew their license, which is expensive. There's only so many times you can sell the main characters and people are less interested in cantina alien #12. Its the same issue Hasbro runs into with their action figures.

They messed up D&D minis with rules changes, and role-players are not going to buy random packs.

The rules change was necessitated by the move to a new edition, but it was actually the non-random packs is what killed D&D minis, since to get more trolls stores had to get more unicorns. Random packs sold VERY well to RPG players, and you had no waste with pegwarmers that didn't move as much. Witness the success of Pathfinder's minis if you want to talk about RPG players not buying random packs, and those are 3-4 times as expensive per figure. Like MTG, boosters didnt rot in stores after the sets went OOP. Non-random, and rising costs (which lead to paint step cutbacks and crappy sculpts) killed it.

weeble1000 wrote:I'm not saying Hasbro wants to buy GW for its IP, but that would be an understandable reason to acquire the company. Hasbro may have been interested in a license, but GW isn't giving up a license to Hasbro for a reasonable rate or terms. Hasbro would have to buy the company.

What is Hasbro (or anyone) going to do with the IP that would warrant purchasing the company at anything close to it's current valuation? If Hasbro thinks that 40k action figures or toys might sell well, it's probably a lot cheaper to hire some artists and product developers to make a line of toys that has those elements than to buy GW. 40k doesn't have the name brand recognition of Star Wars, GI Joe, etc., that would cause the sale of products on the scale Hasbro requires.

It might be GW has bad terms for licensing, but if you look at it in real terms, their IP hasn't done much outside of their miniature wargaming sales channels. There's been some video games and some board and RPG games, but licensing revenue makes a small portion of their revenue. I remember in 2008 when the talk was about Warhammer Online was going to bring in tons of cash for GW and everything would be great. It never broke a million registered users and slowly dwindled down to under 300,000 and then closed after five years of mediocrity.

40k may be the largest IP in the miniature wargaming hobby, but to pay hundreds of millions of pounds in order to publish with it?

Not worth it.

It's all hopeful but Hasbro will not buy GW.

One very important measure in Hasbro's acquisition research is a relative measure of brand equity - even more important than financials. Brand equity basically predicts what could be done with a brand. Thus why, Hasbro would never typically purchase a $7 million company (which is peanuts compared to their size), except when they found such a massively positive brand equity that Avalon Hill made sense.

GW's brand equity is in the toilet. Sorry, but it is. That has been leaked from both Hasbro and Warner Brothers. That alone, will keep Hasbro from even considering purchasing GW. Too much money would have to be spent just to rebuild a brand that the boneheads running GW are destroying. Hasbro could spend A LOT less money developing and marketing a competing IP than they would fixing GW. It is simple business and one which has served Hasbro well.

So while hopeful, pigs will fly, fish will dance, and pigeons will make the next blockbuster movie before Hasbro would acquire GW.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Then we can finally have PonyK, Warhammer:Orks in DisGiZ.
And the, Warhammer, The Gathering

I'd love to see a Warhammer card game do well..

D&D 4th is the only sore point for them in regards to their player base. 4th ed D&D is a great rpg. The problem is it's not a D&D game. They have even said that was their biggeat mistake when makeing it.

Please, that's only just to please that angry grognards. 3E and 3.5E is drastic enough that people hated it from 2E, and to many of them it wouldn't be DND, to first edition players it would be a tragic hilarity that people called 2E a dnd game at all, It's as much DnD as the rest, calling it something else is just something to placate the grognards.

QFT. 3rd edition catered entirely to the spreadsheet crowd that wanted to track 47 different types of bonuses and remember that their +1 circumstance bonus to AC vs. orcs with piercing weapons wears off 27 rounds after eating a pancake. Don't forget unlimited out of combat healing from poking each other with CLW sticks. God forbid you have to think around a problem rather than have the Wizard/Cleric/Druid cast yet another spell to solve the adventure. But people whined because their wizard was only somewhat better than the fighter rather than astronomically better. 3rd edition/pathfinder is great if you'd rather be doing accounting than actually playing the game. If I had to endure another combat where someone cast Mass Dispel Magic and we had to pause for 10+ minutes because every single PC/monster/NPC stats needed to be completely readjusted I'll puke.

Paizo does make great adventures, which I'll remain content to steal for an easier system to run. But 'm too damn old now to spend 15 minutes making a NPC who will live 2 rounds of combat if he's lucky. D&D Next looks like it might do the trick.

 Peregrine wrote:
Yeah, they clearly don't know gaming, which is why MTG is such a hopeless failure.

Honestly, MtG is pretty much the 40k of card games. A really horrible system that has been kept alive because it was the first of its kind to "make it big" and as such people don't want to switch over to another system by this point even though it is better designed. On that line of reasoning I suppose WotC would be a perfect fit for 40k. Just do the same stuff they do with MtG and call it a day. People will buy it.

Would anyone else fear that 40k would turn into a pre-painted miniature game? I mean, has WotC done anything along the lines of miniatures that aren't pre-painted blind packs? I know that that's one of the main issues I would have with WotC picking up Games Workshop's IP is the removal of the hobby and the implementation of a purely game-focused use of the IP.