Switch Theme:

Q&A: Why Games Workshop is shaking up how it works with licensees  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

 Vermis wrote:
I'm sorry I asked...

Okay, how many vidja games can you make out of Necromunda that have a chance of being any good, or innovative, or good sellers?


A truly innovative video game comes out about once every 5 years.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 jonolikespie wrote:
In a retail store yes but for a long time they only stocked it in their warehouses and mail ordered stuff. Why can't we still have that?


Because GW operates under the assumption that once you're a GW customer you will spend all of your non-essential money on GW products, regardless of what they're selling you. So why offer stuff with a low profit margin when they assume you're just going to buy a box of space marines if you don't have BFG to buy? Of course this is unbelievably stupid, but that's how GW works these days.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





West Michigan, deep in Whitebread, USA

Tolkien-inspired and deeply realized world of Warhammer itself,


They might have spoke too soon on that one, happy as I am to see a Mordheim game.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/25 01:58:35




"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."  
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Grimtuff wrote:
 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:
 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Totally pitching my SoB dating sim game.

Will you get a date with the Canoness?

Or settle for the Sister Repentia?

Or be burned for heresy?

Probably heresy.



DEFINITELY Heresy.

SoB are for Big E alone


Damn straight!


Three Battle sisters ain't enough, he needs five!

   
Made in jp
Fixture of Dakka





Japan

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Totally pitching my SoB dating sim game.

Will you get a date with the Canoness?

Or settle for the Sister Repentia?

Or be burned for heresy?

Probably heresy.



You got the hidden ending, the SOB is really a Slaneesh coven, We have such sights to show you

Games Workshop's digital output has increased over the past year. What has changed in your attitude towards licensing?

We need money!

Squidbot;
"That sound? That's the sound of me drinking all my paint and stabbing myself in the eyes with my brushes. "
My Doombringer Space Marine Army
Hello Kitty Space Marines project
Buddhist Space marine Project
Other Projects
Imageshack deleted all my Images Thank you! 
   
Made in au
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control





Adelaide, South Australia

 Kilkrazy wrote:
However I think realistically they are strip mining their history for some easy licensing revenue, rather than trying to build a coherent overall multi-media publishing strategy.

Seconded. Or third, fourth, whatever. This I feel is likely the truth.

More importantly while they're happy to farm these out as digital, we won't see tabletop versions.




Ancient Blood Angels
40IK - PP Conversion Project Files
Warmachine/Hordes 2008 Australian National Champion
Arcanacon Steamroller and Hardcore Champion 2009
Gencon Nationals 2nd Place and Hardcore Champion 2009 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

I think we will see a tabletop version of Total War: Hammer.

The developer has a lot of good history. The game will be a reliable product. It will bring a lot of interest to the tabletop, like Dawn Of War did for 40K.

GW would be fools not to capitalise on that.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW would be fools not to capitalise on that.


Name one time where they capitalised on a licensed product?

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in gb
Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon





Scotland, but nowhere near my rulebook

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW would be fools not to capitalise on that.


Name one time where they capitalised on a licensed product?


Noise Marines, by D-Rok.
   
Made in au
Hacking Proxy Mk.1





Australia

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW would be fools not to capitalise on that.


Name one time where they capitalised on a licensed product?

They have heads on the new sternguard kits for the two characters from the Space Marine game so you could make those characters on the tabletop. Of course they don't actually advertise that in any way and that kit came out years later.

 Fafnir wrote:
Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka






 Peregrine wrote:
 jonolikespie wrote:
In a retail store yes but for a long time they only stocked it in their warehouses and mail ordered stuff. Why can't we still have that?


Because GW operates under the assumption that once you're a GW customer you will spend all of your non-essential money on GW products, regardless of what they're selling you. So why offer stuff with a low profit margin when they assume you're just going to buy a box of space marines if you don't have BFG to buy? Of course this is unbelievably stupid, but that's how GW works these days.


A more likely scenario is that Gw operates under the assumption that its core customers earn enough that $50-$200 releases aren't going to break the piggy bank, if the customer likes what they see. Even the most devoted GW fan is unlikely to buy EVERYTHING the company releases; there's just too much variety for everything to appeal to a single individual.


But anyways, my point is just that I doubt their pricing formula is based on the disposable income of the lowest wage earners who are fans; I think they passed that mark a long, long tine ago.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





London

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

How about 'I am the Black and White Space Marine on the Black and White Bike'?

The Auld Grump


Now that's a joke I've not heard mentioned in a long long time...
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Talys wrote:
A more likely scenario is that Gw operates under the assumption that its core customers earn enough that $50-$200 releases aren't going to break the piggy bank, if the customer likes what they see. Even the most devoted GW fan is unlikely to buy EVERYTHING the company releases; there's just too much variety for everything to appeal to a single individual.


No, I think you're missing the point here. What you're describing is how it works in reality: a customer considers a product, and buys it if they like what they see. If I like the new Tau fortification I can spend my $150 on it. If I don't, I can spend that money on starting Armada, renting a Cessna 152 for an hour, etc. On the other hand, if it's beautiful flying weather then I might make the airplane rental my top priority, and only buy the GW kit if I have to cancel at the last minute. So under this assumption GW's best strategy is to provide a diverse range of products and make sure that if I don't like the first thing I see I still have something to buy. If I don't buy the Tau fortification and don't need any other 40k stuff then GW wants me to buy some BFG ships instead of Armada.

But what GW actually believes is that they already have my $150 (because I compulsively collect Citadelâ„¢ Miniaturesâ„¢ and am thankful for the opportunity to buy them), and the only question is which GW product I'm going to buy with it. If I don't buy the Tau fortification then I'm going to buy some tactical marines or a LRBT squadron. And if I'm even willing to consider the airplane rental or the FFG game then I'm not GW's target market and I don't matter. Under this model GW's best strategy is to focus on product lines with high profit margins and get rid of the rest. I'm still going to buy something from GW even if I can't buy those BFG ships, so why let me spend my $150 on a slow-selling product with a lower profit margin than a 40k plastic kit?

But anyways, my point is just that I doubt their pricing formula is based on the disposable income of the lowest wage earners who are fans; I think they passed that mark a long, long tine ago.


It has nothing to do with income level and everything to do with commitment. GW isn't making an assumption (at least for purposes of what I'm saying) about how much money you have in your hobby budget every week, they're assuming that, whatever the number may be, all of it is going to GW and the only question is what GW products you buy.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






There are times when it seems like GW is drowning, so they yell for someone to throw them an anchor....

The Auld Grump

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in us
Calculating Commissar




pontiac, michigan; usa

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:
 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Totally pitching my SoB dating sim game.

Will you get a date with the Canoness?

Or settle for the Sister Repentia?

Or be burned for heresy?

Probably heresy.



DEFINITELY Heresy.

SoB are for Big E alone


Big Erection?

I actually approve the idea of a 'sisters of battle' dating sim. At this point it's the only way to prevent their faction getting squatted.

Sister: Will you purge heretics with me senpai *blushes*?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think we will see a tabletop version of Total War: Hammer.

The developer has a lot of good history. The game will be a reliable product. It will bring a lot of interest to the tabletop, like Dawn Of War did for 40K.

GW would be fools not to capitalise on that.


After killing off warhammer fantasy for 'age of sigmar' and hearing what they said in one meeting I'm almost certain GW have condescending idiots in charge of the business who are out of touch with their fanbase to such a ridiculous degree they will never understand them. I've mentioned it before when total war: warhammer ends up creating a load of new warhammer fantasy players (or at least people looking to play it) the GW heads of company will attribute this sudden interest as a side effect of global warming. That's about as much faith I have for them connecting the dots.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/26 23:49:14


Join skavenblight today!

http://the-under-empire.proboards.com/ (my skaven forum) 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 jonolikespie wrote:
They have heads on the new sternguard kits for the two characters from the Space Marine game so you could make those characters on the tabletop. Of course they don't actually advertise that in any way and that kit came out years later.


That's it? A couple of heads that have a slight resemblance to some video game characters?


The point I was (obviously) making was that GW very specifically does not capitalise on their licensed products.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka






 Peregrine wrote:
Under this model GW's best strategy is to focus on product lines with high profit margins and get rid of the rest. I'm still going to buy something from GW even if I can't buy those BFG ships, so why let me spend my $150 on a slow-selling product with a lower profit margin than a 40k plastic kit?


Oh, no argument there. I'm sure their strategy for profitability is to focus on big, expensive kits and small, expensive heroes -- the stuff with really high profit margins, like you said.

It has nothing to do with income level and everything to do with commitment. GW isn't making an assumption (at least for purposes of what I'm saying) about how much money you have in your hobby budget every week, they're assuming that, whatever the number may be, all of it is going to GW and the only question is what GW products you buy.


I see what you mean. I thought you were trying to say that whether someone has $150 or $1,500 a week to spend on stuff that makes them happy, they'll blow it all on GW models, which sounded a bit extreme But yeah, GW figures that its ideal customers will spend a really large portion of their hobby budget on GW products. I don't think that they figure 100%, because otherwise, they wouldn't make things like airbrush paints (since they don't have or sell airbrushes) -- but definitely close to it.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The point I was (obviously) making was that GW very specifically does not capitalise on their licensed products.


I agree. But other than Dawn of War, and to a lesser degree, Armageddon... I'm not entirely sure there's any licensed product that's been worth capitalizing on Most of those licensed games are painful to play. I vaguely remember a turn-based PC strategy game fifteen or so years ago with space marines versus Chaos that was mildly fun, but it was only fun because I like 40k; if you took out the space marines and CSM and replaced them with two other species of aliens, I wouldn't have given the game ten minutes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/27 00:11:14


 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 jonolikespie wrote:
They have heads on the new sternguard kits for the two characters from the Space Marine game so you could make those characters on the tabletop. Of course they don't actually advertise that in any way and that kit came out years later.


That's it? A couple of heads that have a slight resemblance to some video game characters?


I would like to add that I have those heads and the resemblance is slight enough to be coincidental.

Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I agree.


*raises eyebrow*

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not entirely sure there's any licensed product that's been worth capitalizing on...


Not really the point. And there are more licensed GW products than just video games as well. I should know - I've worked on a fair few of them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Most of those licensed games are painful to play. I vaguely remember a turn-based PC strategy game fifteen or so years ago with space marines versus Chaos that was mildly fun, but it was only fun because I like 40k; if you took out the space marines and CSM and replaced them with two other species of aliens, I wouldn't have given the game ten minutes.


This much is true. There are a lot of bull gak in games that we tend to live with because it's 40K. The original Dawn of War was quite a frustrating experience, taking the research/upgrade happy nonsene (and even the interface) of Star Craft and applying it to 40K (why do I have to keep on researching Power Fists?) that was only fixed in the latter games.

Incidentally the game you are describing is Chaos Gate, and if you were a fan of turn-based squad combat games with persistent forces (and persistent bugs!) like X-Com, Jagged Alliance and Wages of War (anyone remember that?) then it would be appealing without the veneer of 40K.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Talys wrote:
I'm not entirely sure there's any licensed product that's been worth capitalizing on


Everything is worth capitalizing on, because capitalizing on licensed products is practically free. You have your marketing department put together some "if you liked {this game} why not play it on the tabletop" material, you put some signs advertising the games in your retail stores for the people who come into a GW store thinking it's for video games, etc. In fact, it's one of the main reasons to have licensed products at all. You let someone else give you money to do your advertising for you. The only reason this doesn't happen is the sheer idiocy of GW's belief that marketing is a waste of money because their target market already spends all of their money on GW.

Most of those licensed games are painful to play. I vaguely remember a turn-based PC strategy game fifteen or so years ago with space marines versus Chaos that was mildly fun, but it was only fun because I like 40k; if you took out the space marines and CSM and replaced them with two other species of aliens, I wouldn't have given the game ten minutes.


Sure, but what if your friend loves 40k and you play the mediocre game just to play with them? Even a bad game is still a marketing opportunity because the cost of that opportunity is so low.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/27 02:07:11


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I agree.


*raises eyebrow*


My Jedi mind powers have succeeded in convincing HBMC to talk to himself!


 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Incidentally the game you are describing is Chaos Gate, and if you were a fan of turn-based squad combat games with persistent forces (and persistent bugs!) like X-Com, Jagged Alliance and Wages of War (anyone remember that?) then it would be appealing without the veneer of 40K.


I am a HUGE fan of TBS games; a good TBS is probably the only thing I like more than miniatures and tabletop games. My two favorite games of all time are Civilization and X-Com, in that order. I even play silly TBS games on Nintendo DS or on my phone Panzer General is also a great game; I just wasn't really into the theme.

And yeah, I think you're right... it was probably Chaos Gate. The persistent squad (which X-Com does awesomely) is not necessary and often allows the player to mess with game mechanics at the later stages as skills get maxed -- but I still enjoy it


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Peregrine wrote:
Sure, but what if your friend loves 40k and you play the mediocre game just to play with them? Even a bad game is still a marketing opportunity because the cost of that opportunity is so low.


Yeah, if it increases the player base of another property, why not, right? It's just that generally speaking, 40k-themed computer games are pretty awful, and don't leave people who aren't already fans with a pleasant feeling about, well, a whole lot of anything. My wife kind of liked Space Hulk (the tabletop version), so she tried the PC game and had some very unkind words

Frankly, I think GW would be better off having a lot fewer games -- with just a couple of games that are at least memorable in a positive way, if not hits. Games of the quality of Mass Effect or Titanfall or Halo COULD be 40k themed. But... we get stuck with stuff that even people who want to like the games have trouble playing through them.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/27 02:41:40


 
   
Made in au
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control





Adelaide, South Australia

 Talys wrote:

I agree. But other than Dawn of War, and to a lesser degree, Armageddon... I'm not entirely sure there's any licensed product that's been worth capitalizing on


I think, if they released the characters (particularly the Lieutenant) from Space Marine with rules in White Dwarf, even as web exclusives, you'd get more than a few orders. Same for the Dawn of War characters.

Ancient Blood Angels
40IK - PP Conversion Project Files
Warmachine/Hordes 2008 Australian National Champion
Arcanacon Steamroller and Hardcore Champion 2009
Gencon Nationals 2nd Place and Hardcore Champion 2009 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Gig Harbor, WA

 Kojiro wrote:
 Talys wrote:

I agree. But other than Dawn of War, and to a lesser degree, Armageddon... I'm not entirely sure there's any licensed product that's been worth capitalizing on


I think, if they released the characters (particularly the Lieutenant) from Space Marine with rules in White Dwarf, even as web exclusives, you'd get more than a few orders. Same for the Dawn of War characters.


If I were running GW licensing, there'd be a model for every major character of the video games, the comic books, and the novels. People like that stuff. Blood Ravens would have gotten a mini-codex and an upgrade kit. There'd have been a fancy model released at the same time as the game Space marine. Eisenhorn and Ravenor would have been the title characters of that inquisitor game (and it would have been 28mm instead of stupid 54).

They actually did something like this for W.A.R. The collector's edition came with Grimlok and Gazbag. I've still got mine some where. but they didn't bother to do anything ELSE with it. Its just so half assed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/27 06:34:41


 
   
Made in au
Hacking Proxy Mk.1





Australia

 argonak wrote:
If I were running GW licensing, there'd be a model for every major character of the video games, the comic books, and the novels.
That's a big one I think, GW have a ton of beloved characters from their own books and haven't tried capitalizing on that at all recently (I think they had a few models for Guant and his ghosts like 10 years ago).

It's just plain dumb. People would be all over that.

 Fafnir wrote:
Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 argonak wrote:
If I were running GW licensing, there'd be a model for every major character of the video games, the comic books, and the novels.
Upon the release of Dawn of War: Dark Crusade GW should have had a metal character box out that month that had the Commanders of Kronus box that had miniatures for Davin Thule, Gorgutz, Taldeer, Eliphas the Inheritor, Lukas Alexander, Kais, and the Kronus Necron Lord.

 argonak wrote:
Blood Ravens would have gotten a mini-codex and an upgrade kit.
Yep. The fact that after 7 games the Blood Ravens didn't get a think is just amazing (FFG have done more with the Blood Ravens in their Deathwatch line than GW ever did).

 argonak wrote:
There'd have been a fancy model released at the same time as the game Space marine.
Same goes for Ultramarine. A squad box of the characters from the movie. They should have done that. Instead they did nothing, and again FFG did more with the Space Marine release than GW did.

 argonak wrote:
They actually did something like this for W.A.R. The collector's edition came with Grimlok and Gazbag. I've still got mine some where. but they didn't bother to do anything ELSE with it. Its just so half assed.
Just another example of them failing to capitalise on their own properties.

 jonolikespie wrote:
If I were running GW licensing, there'd be a model for every major character of the video games, the comic books, and the novels.
That's a big one I think, GW have a ton of beloved characters from their own books and haven't tried capitalizing on that at all recently (I think they had a few models for Guant and his ghosts like 10 years ago).
They made some Gaunts Ghosts, but GW doesn't just avoid doing things with their BL characters they actively avoid acknowledging them.



This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/10/27 07:39:42


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Three new memes -- Emprah, Metal Bawkses, and Shess Marines -- appeared on DakkaDakka because of Dawn Of War. There were also lots of people discussing the (non-canon) fluff from the game as if it was canon. Clearly, lots of new players came into tabletop 40K after playing DoW.

In other words, DoW did a good job of selling models to new players. Selling models is supposed to be GW's core business.

We also know that traditional boardgames like Carcassone and Ticket To Ride have undergone a surge of popularity in the past 10 years, accompanied by digital versions, and the publishers of the physical games have found that the digital versions have increased sales of the tabletop product.

There is also the reverse effect; boardgame and wargame players often pick up digital versions to play by themselves or on the train, etc.

From all the above it is clear that a well-thought out licensing programme would be a big money-spinner for GW. But that is not what they've got.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

*I* came into 40k after playing Dawn of War, for what it's worth.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in gr
Longtime Dakkanaut




Halandri

I'd love to see a Necromunda Tower Defence game where you control the arbites and try stop an underhive uprising breaking through the wall.

At the end of each level there could be a house of the dead style sub game where you then walk through the area around the bastion you just defended and have to clear out any remaining insurgents.

Perhaps the main game could be tied to a House Mawloc resource management game where you have to keep the Arbites recruited and stocked while at the same time managing the hives other priorities, such as (capturing and) exporting tithes for the imperial guard, honouring commitments for the export of arms, and negotiating contracts, such as with the different houses other who gets to be in charge of productions of lasguns, flak armour, etc for export out the hive.

A second mirror game could later be released where you are the opposite; in the role of a cult leader and you have to recruit gangs to support your uprisings, all the while trying to manage their resources and maintain their allegiance. You can try barter support from enemies of the imperium, infiltrate the hive with spies and generally try to overthrow the current masters of the spire.

These games could work in cohort with each other for a multiplayer experience where it is establishment vs uprising.

So there you go, loads of games could fit under a Necromunda skin!
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control





Silver Spring, MD

nareik wrote:
smart words

Feck, I would buy that in a heartbeat.

Battlefleet Gothic ships and markers at my store, GrimDarkBits:
 
   
Made in ca
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought





Canada

 Peregrine wrote:
Because GW operates under the assumption that once you're a GW customer you will spend all of your non-essential money on GW products, regardless of what they're selling you. So why offer stuff with a low profit margin when they assume you're just going to buy a box of space marines if you don't have BFG to buy? Of course this is unbelievably stupid, but that's how GW works these days.
Remember: if they do not spend all their disposable income on GW mini's they are NOT a GW customer.
The target market is rather self-fulfilling.

I personally would like to see an Imperial Assassin first person open world shooter.
Playing all four of the different groups would be a completely different style of play each time.
Just not sure if I like the Assassins Creed or Batman type world (what am I thinking: always be the Batman).

An open universe Inquisition game would be neat, something like the StarCraft2 between mission selection and research with an X-com form of play since these are to be surgical strikes and a team of vastly differing skills. Though research would be more navigating the imperium hierarchy to lay hands on what you need (mechanicus missions as "favors").
I could just see "A supply prefect has arrived!" "What??!! this is something I requisitioned a decade ago!!" (random supply items! Just like a box of chocolates...).
Developing skills of intimidation and research to snag better stuff out of the local governance of the planet.

There is lots there in the fluff to make pretty much any type of game.

GW has cannibalized everything else, why deny them this?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/27 18:44:08


A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: