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.

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'm confused as to how much we 'lost.' Two special characters, right? And Looted Wagons will be fading into obscurity, so three things.
Yeah, certain options can't be troops. So? Everyone scores in 7th edition, we have unlimited FOCs, or we can play FOCless and do whatever we want. Shuffling options to troops no longer means much, other than giving a reroll on Warlord Traits and some other small buff.

Yeah. as I've mentioned, I don't even play Orks, but to see an amazingly Ork-ified Land Raider painted red with boyz on top was amazing to behold. Looted Wagons were a very cool part of Orks. R.I.P.

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'm confused as to how much we 'lost.' Two special characters, right? And Looted Wagons will be fading into obscurity, so three things.
Yeah, certain options can't be troops. So? Everyone scores in 7th edition, we have unlimited FOCs, or we can play FOCless and do whatever we want. Shuffling options to troops no longer means much, other than giving a reroll on Warlord Traits and some other small buff.

Yeah. as I've mentioned, I don't even play Orks, but to see an amazingly Ork-ified Land Raider painted red with boyz on top was amazing to behold. Looted Wagons were a very cool part of Orks. R.I.P.

The WD article had this to say:

Looted Wagons have been part of Ork collections for many years now, so we asked Jervis to write us some rules to let you use them in your army. (You can, of course, simply use them as Battlewagons if you prefer)

So those "Looted Land Raiders" can still see usage as Battlewagons. Nothing is stopping people from doing so.

krodarklorr wrote:
Things like this aren't out of the ordinary.

Me: "I'd like to pick up my pre-order of Mass Effect 3, please."
Clerk: "Sure thing, did you wanna go ahead and pick up the DLC for that as well? It's only $9.99."


Because that makes sense.

Yeah, it does. It's like going to McDonalds, buying a hamburger, and then adding a side of fries and a drink. To use your example, Mass Effect 3 was a full game. Feature-length, full content, etc. If there hadn't been anyDLC, nobidy would have thought a thing was missing. (Except the ending, but that's an entirely different problem.) The DLC is an extra 6-10 hours of game that you can buy if you want to. If you feel that Mass Effect wasn't long enough and needed 6-10 more hours of Gameplay to be reasonably priced, the DLC still doesn't solve your problems, because its not the same game. It's a new mission, new content, running on the same engine. A different story entirely.
So, to people who complain about Day 1 DLC: Why don't you complain about all DLC? Because of the release time? So, since the company already had it made, they should hand out a separate product for free?

It means they won't have Objective Secured.
And to be honest, I think that would be a bit too strong on Nobz and bikers.

What people miss the most is the option to take a biker-only army.
That could be fixed with a formation/detachment, they just need to release it.

Yeah, this is their new 2 pronged business strategy of the fiscal year to try and maintain their current revenues in order to hide their overall situation from shareholders. On one hand you release tons of codex's one after the other to try and hold up sales and on the other cut up said codex's into supplements, all the while not charging under $50 for any of these products.

Expect a new ripoff trick from GW in about a year.

Waaaghpower wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:
Things like this aren't out of the ordinary.

Me: "I'd like to pick up my pre-order of Mass Effect 3, please."
Clerk: "Sure thing, did you wanna go ahead and pick up the DLC for that as well? It's only $9.99."


Because that makes sense.

Yeah, it does. It's like going to McDonalds, buying a hamburger, and then adding a side of fries and a drink. To use your example, Mass Effect 3 was a full game. Feature-length, full content, etc. If there hadn't been anyDLC, nobidy would have thought a thing was missing. (Except the ending, but that's an entirely different problem.) The DLC is an extra 6-10 hours of game that you can buy if you want to. If you feel that Mass Effect wasn't long enough and needed 6-10 more hours of Gameplay to be reasonably priced, the DLC still doesn't solve your problems, because its not the same game. It's a new mission, new content, running on the same engine. A different story entirely.
So, to people who complain about Day 1 DLC: Why don't you complain about all DLC? Because of the release time? So, since the company already had it made, they should hand out a separate product for free?

The only DLC that was available for Mass Effect 3 at launch was "From Ashes" which unlocked Javik and a single mission that got you Javik.

Waaaghpower wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:
Things like this aren't out of the ordinary.

Me: "I'd like to pick up my pre-order of Mass Effect 3, please."
Clerk: "Sure thing, did you wanna go ahead and pick up the DLC for that as well? It's only $9.99."


Because that makes sense.

Yeah, it does. It's like going to McDonalds, buying a hamburger, and then adding a side of fries and a drink. To use your example, Mass Effect 3 was a full game. Feature-length, full content, etc. If there hadn't been anyDLC, nobidy would have thought a thing was missing. (Except the ending, but that's an entirely different problem.) The DLC is an extra 6-10 hours of game that you can buy if you want to. If you feel that Mass Effect wasn't long enough and needed 6-10 more hours of Gameplay to be reasonably priced, the DLC still doesn't solve your problems, because its not the same game. It's a new mission, new content, running on the same engine. A different story entirely.
So, to people who complain about Day 1 DLC: Why don't you complain about all DLC? Because of the release time? So, since the company already had it made, they should hand out a separate product for free?

Because DLC is supposed to be like mini expansions that come out to give people some extra stuff. And also, the character from the DLC, was a (SPOILER) Prothean. Uh, that's kind of a big effing deal, don't you think? Why would that not be included in the original game? It was obviously just a way for bioware to make more money right off the bat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
I'm confused as to how much we 'lost.' Two special characters, right? And Looted Wagons will be fading into obscurity, so three things.
Yeah, certain options can't be troops. So? Everyone scores in 7th edition, we have unlimited FOCs, or we can play FOCless and do whatever we want. Shuffling options to troops no longer means much, other than giving a reroll on Warlord Traits and some other small buff.

Yeah. as I've mentioned, I don't even play Orks, but to see an amazingly Ork-ified Land Raider painted red with boyz on top was amazing to behold. Looted Wagons were a very cool part of Orks. R.I.P.

The WD article had this to say:

Looted Wagons have been part of Ork collections for many years now, so we asked Jervis to write us some rules to let you use them in your army. (You can, of course, simply use them as Battlewagons if you prefer)

So those "Looted Land Raiders" can still see usage as Battlewagons. Nothing is stopping people from doing so.

I suppose you have a point, I mean I sure as hell would do that. But nonetheless, the Looted Wagon was awesome. I was even gonna help my friend build one by possibly giving him some Doomsday Ark sprues.

Krodaklorr, so you're saying that DLC on Day One doesn't give people extra stuff to play?

Waaaghpower wrote:
Krodaklorr, so you're saying that DLC on Day One doesn't give people extra stuff to play?

It defeats the purpose. It basically advertises that the game is not all it could be, right when it comes out. It's just for profit. They could have easily incorporated it into the original game.

So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

I honestly can't see how you can defend that. I don't want to have to pay for something that should have been included in the original product.

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

I honestly can't see how you can defend that. I don't want to have to pay for something that should have been included in the original product.

Here's the two options:
You think the game wasn't big enough and needs more content, or...
You're being hypocritical.

It's fine if you think a specific game isn't worth the price. But when you dismiss all Day 1 DLC because you believe it should be given away for free merely because of timing, well... You're asking for more content for free, in whatever way you phrase it.

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

Aren't we talking about a unit that is removed from the codex and then added as DLC?

Kangodo wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

Aren't we talking about a unit that is removed from the codex and then added as DLC?

I'm talking about video games and supplements. The Looted Wagon thing was stupid.

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Krodaklorr, so you're saying that DLC on Day One doesn't give people extra stuff to play?

It defeats the purpose. It basically advertises that the game is not all it could be, right when it comes out. It's just for profit. They could have easily incorporated it into the original game.

I'm gonna let you in on a secret of Mass Effect 3 just real quick.

There were two different teams working on content. "From Ashes" was done by the second team--and what's more, the reason it was released as "DLC" is because it wasn't finished when the discs went to print.

What you should ask yourself is: "Do I get more or less entertainment for my money than 5 years ago?"

My games are more expensive and they have often less content in them.
My models are 50% more expensive.
My codex is 50% more expensive.

Do I also get 50% more quality and quantity? I don't think so.

Waaaghpower wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

I honestly can't see how you can defend that. I don't want to have to pay for something that should have been included in the original product.

Here's the two options:
You think the game wasn't big enough and needs more content, or...
You're being hypocritical.

It's fine if you think a specific game isn't worth the price. But when you dismiss all Day 1 DLC because you believe it should be given away for free merely because of timing, well... You're asking for more content for free, in whatever way you phrase it.

So for the sake of argument, you'd be okay with going out and buying Skyrim right when it comes out, but you'd have to pay another 9.99 to get access to the Thieves Guild? Or, from what you're saying, the fact that it's available day 1 is irrelevant, and the game is 100% complete without it. You're completely okay with that?

The key here is is that GW is now in the mindset to stretch a release over several weeks rather than in one large chunk.

Codices and rules are no exception. They're chopping up the rules and adding things in (and keep in mind, we've been asking for factions and supplements for years now so we're as much to blame for this as they are) at a stretched out rate that this is what we should expect from now on.

 Kanluwen wrote:

krodarklorr wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Krodaklorr, so you're saying that DLC on Day One doesn't give people extra stuff to play?

It defeats the purpose. It basically advertises that the game is not all it could be, right when it comes out. It's just for profit. They could have easily incorporated it into the original game.

I'm gonna let you in on a secret of Mass Effect 3 just real quick.

There were two different teams working on content. "From Ashes" was done by the second team--and what's more, the reason it was released as "DLC" is because it wasn't finished when the discs went to print.

Well, that makes sense, though I don't agree with printing the discs before it was finished. And then charging for it. I felt it was actually a pretty deep story to have not in the original game. But that does explain it, I suppose.

Clearly this discussion isn't getting anywhere, so I bid my adiueu. (Adiue? I can never remember how to spell that.)
I bid my goodbye.

Waaaghpower wrote:
So you *Do* want more content for the same price then?

Just what is wrong with that?

Kangodo wrote:
It means they won't have Objective Secured.
And to be honest, I think that would be a bit too strong on Nobz and bikers.

What people miss the most is the option to take a biker-only army.
That could be fixed with a formation/detachment, they just need to release it.

But Objective secured on a Holofield Wave Serpent is fine?

Yes, what people miss the most IS the option to take a biker only army.
It shouldn't have to be fixed. It should've been in the codex to begin with. If they do release a Kult of Speed supplement then my suspicions will be confirmed .
(If they don't then we can just chalk this up to GW being grossly incompetent.)
It's like taking out Khan and Bikes as Troops in the Space marine codex then releasing a White Scar supplement to 'patch' it.

And the *More* content for the same amount of money argument? Asinine. Two reasons;

We're not getting our money's worth now. What we want is to be satisfied customers not customers feeling like we've been ripped off.

And look at the Space Marine codex. Full of cool stuff, not just fluff and pictures, but amazing faction options that allowed you to build an army that can play anyway you want and still remain legal and fluffy. (Or Semi fluffy) Chapter tactics (Most good, two bad) for the main Space marine Chapters and even some of the obscure ones. (Poor, poor Raven Guard though...)

Bigger book, more rules, more options, more stuff for the same price. It shows that they can put out a quality product when they want, something worth the money. You cannot seriously tell me that there isn't enough fluff about different Ork Clans to justify a 'Clan tactics' option in the Ork book. (Or Chaos space Marine book for that matter) They have pages dedicated to the different clans in the new Ork book.

But they couldn't do a Clan thing to give it some variety? Why?

They did it before. They released clan specific rules as a supplement (or chapter approved, I'm a bit fuzzy on that) last time around. But they couldn't put in an extra page in the Ork codex to give it the same depth? To show that they actually cared about the player base and the product they were presenting. Could they not just cut one giant picture of an ork Nob and slip that in there?

The writing on the wall for this was in the December to Remember™ event of 2013; they are going to try and nickle and dime you the most they can.

What was an all inclusive content delivery system, the White Dwarf, now has its parts strewn across multiple publishing methods because print magazines are dying. Now adapting to a digital means of rules production is smart; you see many other companies either giving more content delivery through digital, or their main competitor going nearly entirely digital.

Games Workshop is a bit like Nintendo in a fashion. They create a beloved product that a rerelease of something familiar gives us all that warm glow to bask in and graciously buy it. However, after so many revisions and iterations of the same franchises, we become less welcoming to them. Our tastes get dulled to the same sugary sweet if we have it time and time again. Then, with the inability to really cope with internet of today coupled with doubling down on tired ways, they suddenly start losing a lot of ground. Gimmicks might bring them back or support them (their gimmicks being cut-cut-cut! tactics couple with these stretching content maneuvers), but those only go so far.

That's where the parallel ends because Nintendo has had some smarts and are pulling up from their nose dive. And they actually leverage all their IP fairly well. Their strong media presence that put forward warm business types that you wanna hug (your body is, of course, ready) also makes you still smile at beast. But most of the notable names of GW have bailed leaving one tired identity with most of the others buried under NDAs or behind "The Games Workshop Design Team™."

Where I feel one company will recover and realize their deficiencies, the other either doesn't have the right capability, management, or agility to do so. Time will tell this month on what course GW is destined...

 WarOne wrote:
...(and keep in mind, we've been asking for factions and supplements for years now so we're as much to blame for this as they are)

We're most certainly not to blame for GW choosing to charge extra for material that could have been (and previously has been) included in the codexes.

Adding the option for variant army lists doesn't require a separate publication. The Traits and Doctrines systems in the 4th edition codexes added somewhere near a gajillion variant build options to Marine and Guard armies. Removing these and releasing watered-down versions as DLC was entirely GW's doing, none of mine.

 insaniak wrote:

 WarOne wrote:
...(and keep in mind, we've been asking for factions and supplements for years now so we're as much to blame for this as they are)

We're most certainly not to blame for GW choosing to charge extra for material that could have been (and previously has been) included in the codexes.

Adding the option for variant army lists doesn't require a separate publication. The Traits and Doctrines systems in the 4th edition codexes added somewhere near a gajillion variant build options to Marine and Guard armies. Removing these and releasing watered-down versions as DLC was entirely GW's doing, none of mine.

Let's not forget about the pretty fun Chapter Tactics in the Space Marine codex and the fact that Forge world released a bunch of those FOR FREE.

 Celtic Strike wrote:
Let's not forget about the pretty fun Chapter Tactics in the Space Marine codex and the fact that Forge world released a bunch of those FOR FREE.

Psst. Check the last page of the Forgeworld Ork Dread Mob list. That should, at the very least, solve your immediate problem.

 insaniak wrote:

 WarOne wrote:
...(and keep in mind, we've been asking for factions and supplements for years now so we're as much to blame for this as they are)

We're most certainly not to blame for GW choosing to charge extra for material that could have been (and previously has been) included in the codexes.

Adding the option for variant army lists doesn't require a separate publication. The Traits and Doctrines systems in the 4th edition codexes added somewhere near a gajillion variant build options to Marine and Guard armies. Removing these and releasing watered-down versions as DLC was entirely GW's doing, none of mine.

I agree we are in no part in the same room as the GW executives making the decision to make add-ons to codices and charge through the nose for them.

It takes two to tango and so far, GW is content to release the codices chopped up and sold as separate parts. If the idea was bad and not making money, they would not try and peddle this on us. I do believe people are buying these supplements and GW has seen no reason to stop.

But a year and change after they started doing it, it has only gotten worse and the speed of the supplements is now almost exceeding the actual codex release!

This has been going on for over a year, and the previous 6 monthly profits took a huge dive. Are they related? All signs point to yes. The release of 7th was a knee-jerk reaction to squeeze some more revenue into the following 6 month report so it must have looked very grim too.

 Yonan wrote:
This has been going on for over a year, and the previous 6 monthly profits took a huge dive. Are they related? All signs point to yes. The release of 7th was a knee-jerk reaction to squeeze some more revenue into the following 6 month report so it must have looked very grim too.

The 7 million difference between the 2012 and 2013 same period was definitely significant. But for what it is worth, GW is not adapting enough to compete against what is becoming a much more crowded field for people to select miniatures from. GW is not the only company out there and their attempts to stay afloat have not caused the roof for them to cave in.

They do need to address the issue if their revenue continues to fall but their strategy of supplements continues unabated.

Just as GW was ridiculously slow to react to the internet, they are slow to react to this part of their failing business model. Which is a substantial part of why other companies are doing so well. It's not so much that they're not selling - they're probably profitable since they'd cost so little to produce. It's that they're causing a drop in sales across the board as they drive players away, but GW doesn't realise it.