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.
Lanrak wrote: @Korinov.
I was pointing out that if GW plc actually made a profit off increased sales this year,because of out side influences.
That GW plc still have not fixed the core issues with their ' business plan'.
As some of the pro GW crowd are singing the praises of the new C.E.O for 'righting the ship.'
I simply wanted to point out the acid test of what a 'fixed GW plc' would actually do because it made sense for them to do it.
(Plastic manufacture heavily rewards the sales direction of economies of scale.EG high sales volumes= more profit.Raising prices to restrict sales is counter intuitive to the basic premise of plastic manufacture.AFAIK ONLY GW plc do this.)
Good, I see it now.
The pro-GW crowd that currently praises Rountree as GW's savior and "the man who's turning the ship around" are the same ones who two-three years ago adhered to the everything is fine, nothing is broken thing. Never ever expect to read the slightest amount of criticism from them, as AoS was perfectly fine when it was released ("who needs points anyway?") and now of course is the best game evar.
It happens when GW is everything you know.
The core issues won't likely be fixed anytime soon. Prices keep going up with each new release, and rules are more bloated than ever. I guess as long as they manage to put out enough shiny new toys at a constant rate, they'll somehow manage to keep going. It's obvious that, at this point, the remaining customers are the ones who do not care about insane prices nor abysmal rules (the ones who did left a while a go).
Progress is like a herd of pigs: everybody is interested in the produced benefits, but nobody wants to deal with all the resulting gak.
GW customers deserve every bit of outrageous princing they get.
Kairic Acolytes? £30 for 20. That's cheaper than the Bloodbound equivalent.
Disciples of Tzeentch? £20 book, contains everything you need to play that army, apart from the models.
AoS rules? Quite the opposite of being bloated.
Bloodbowl? £20 for a team and themed tokens. Main game for £65, first expansion if you want to play league games, £15. So for £100 you can get everything releases to far. That's not overly expensive, especially if you buy from a discounter.
Calth and Prospero? Truly impressive value, even just using standard GW prices, and not looking at them from the FW equivalent.
40k however does need to go on a diet in both regards.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
I'd be cautious with the BB comparisons, team boxes aren't the final purchase if you wish to partipate with league play, and star players could very well run you almost the cost of a team individually. Heaven knows what a non-plastic team will ultimately cost.
It's a low count game, so it isn't ever going to be ludicrous money, but, as with most of your examples, the prices only look really good when framed against other GW prices, if you compare them to what else is out there, they're at best competitive and in some cases still overpriced.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: I'd be cautious with the BB comparisons, team boxes aren't the final purchase if you wish to partipate with league play, and star players could very well run you almost the cost of a team individually. Heaven knows what a non-plastic team will ultimately cost.
It's a low count game, so it isn't ever going to be ludicrous money, but, as with most of your examples, the prices only look really good when framed against other GW prices, if you compare them to what else is out there, they're at best competitive and in some cases still overpriced.
12 Blood Bowl minis in something like the Skaven team box vs. 3 Guild Ball minis in the Morticians "starter" box, for the same price, certainly looks good versus the competition...
of course, this is one time where i actually liked the Steamforged Games minis better than the Games Workshop ones, so i bought them last year, at our local conventions, Guild Ball was played at all three events...
it will be interesting to see if it has a stronger showing than BB, now that BB has been re-released...
i do hope GB continues to grow, because i am behind small companies with original ideas and great execution, 100%
Yeah, but two boxes to fill out a league roster, plus £10-15 a pop for a star player or two and all of a sudden you're spending the same on a BB league team as you are on a full tournament roster for GB.
Model count may be higher, but the cost to play is comparable. One can even argue that all GB minis are "star players" in the way that GW would portray them (i.e. they're individual characters that all differ, whereas the plastic BB stuff is all generic redshirt stuff) and then the cost per model stacks up well. Plus they're made from a higher cost material with a more labor intensive method by a smaller company with fewer economies, even if they are more per model, at least one can see why.
This is why it's important to take a holistic approach to the cost of a game and not just cherry pick what looks well priced and what looks expensive and put them head to head.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plus BB probably better compares to Dreadball, which embarrasses GW in terms of VFM, but I'm not going to advance that as an argument because I can't be dealing with 10 pages about how GW's better quality somehow justifies a disproportionate price differential.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/25 00:55:30
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: Yeah, but two boxes to fill out a league roster, plus £10-15 a pop for a star player or two and all of a sudden you're spending the same on a BB league team as you are on a full tournament roster for GB.
Model count may be higher, but the cost to play is comparable. One can even argue that all GB minis are "star players" in the way that GW would portray them (i.e. they're individual characters that all differ, whereas the plastic BB stuff is all generic redshirt stuff) and then the cost per model stacks up well. Plus they're made from a higher cost material with a more labor intensive method by a smaller company with fewer economies, even if they are more per model, at least one can see why.
This is why it's important to take a holistic approach to the cost of a game and not just cherry pick what looks well priced and what looks expensive and put them head to head.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plus BB probably better compares to Dreadball, which embarrasses GW in terms of VFM, but I'm not going to advance that as an argument because I can't be dealing with 10 pages about how GW's better quality somehow justifies a disproportionate price differential.
you put forth the argument that Mad Doc Grotsnik examples of pricing only look good when framed against other GW prices...
i gave you an example where the economies of scale are giving us plastic teams for 4x cheaper than another company's metal models, and you still have to come back with a "yeah, but" just to prove you're right...
if the cost to play GB and BB are comparable, then that can only be a good thing, right???
much easier for people to choose GB, and its awesome models
you must have seen those rubbish Dreadball minis, if you already know that they are a much lower quality seriously, i wouldn't wish restic models on my worst enemy...
as soon as you lay them out, and see what a nightmare they are to prep and build, any VFM goes right out the window as you throw your Dreadball minis in a box, and never look at them again...
everyone that i know has been building their BB minis with big smiles on their faces...
besides, i have never once tried to justify GW's prices...
i've only ever said that i have no problem with the cost of any model, from any company, if i want the model enough, and it is in a material that i like to work with...
nothing justifies spending money on Finecast :(
did you miss the part where i said that in this comparison, my money goes to Guild Ball, even though they cost more per mini???
quality over quantity, and supporting the little guy
Azreal13 wrote: Yeah, but two boxes to fill out a league roster, plus £10-15 a pop for a star player or two and all of a sudden you're spending the same on a BB league team as you are on a full tournament roster for GB.
Model count may be higher, but the cost to play is comparable. One can even argue that all GB minis are "star players" in the way that GW would portray them (i.e. they're individual characters that all differ, whereas the plastic BB stuff is all generic redshirt stuff) and then the cost per model stacks up well. Plus they're made from a higher cost material with a more labor intensive method by a smaller company with fewer economies, even if they are more per model, at least one can see why.
This is why it's important to take a holistic approach to the cost of a game and not just cherry pick what looks well priced and what looks expensive and put them head to head.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plus BB probably better compares to Dreadball, which embarrasses GW in terms of VFM, but I'm not going to advance that as an argument because I can't be dealing with 10 pages about how GW's better quality somehow justifies a disproportionate price differential.
you put forth the argument that Mad Doc Grotsnik examples of pricing only look good when framed against other GW prices...
i gave you an example where the economies of scale are giving us plastic teams for 4x cheaper than another company's metal models, and you still have to come back with a "yeah, but" just to prove you're right...
if the cost to play GB and BB are comparable, then that can only be a good thing, right???
much easier for people to choose GB, and its awesome models
You missed the bit where I said this
if you compare them to what else is out there, they're at best competitive and in some cases still overpriced.
Which is a shame, as it kinda heads the whole point of this little tangent off at the pass.
you must have seen those rubbish Dreadball minis, if you already know that they are a much lower quality seriously, i wouldn't wish restic models on my worst enemy...
as soon as you lay them out, and see what a nightmare they are to prep and build, any VFM goes right out the window as you throw your Dreadball minis in a box, and never look at them again...
everyone that i know has been building their BB minis with big smiles on their faces...
I've built and painted several DB teams, as game pieces they're fine, nothing special, but nobody could accuse them of being overpriced.
besides, i have never once tried to justify GW's prices...
i've only ever said that i have no problem with the cost of any model, from any company, if i want the model enough, and it is in a material that i like to work with...
nothing justifies spending money on Finecast :(
Yeah, you're in the "got mine" camp, this is well established.
did you miss the part where i said that in this comparison, my money goes to Guild Ball, even though they cost more per mini???
quality over quantity, and supporting the little guy
Missed? No. Why, was there supposed to be some sort of presentation of a digital lollypop or something because you bought some stuff that you liked?
Frankly you've tried to manufacture some sort of counter argument to my point that BB isn't necessarily as cheap is it appears when you take into account all of the expenses (note I wasn't claiming it was expensive, just that it wasn't necessarily a good example of "cheap") by manufacturing a comparison I hadn't drawn, disagreeing with a point I explicitly said I wasn't advocating, reiterating for about the thousandth time that you don't care what minis cost and then somehow expecting praise for buying stuff.
A cynic would think you were disagreeing with me for the sake of it, rather than presenting any sort of valid counterpoint. A hardened cynic may use a term that is frequently used to describe people disagreeing for the sole purpose of doing so, one beginning with T.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
i am not trying to manufacture anything, Az...
i just posted the first thing that came to mind about my personal experience as a customer at the FLGS...
BB looks great, and nicely priced for the quality and amount of minis that you get, and it is setting people's nostalgia button on fire...
DB doesn't even get a look in...
GB does...
seems like a valid point to me...
i wasn't trying to argue with you at all...
there is no need to be rude with this "T" B.S., man...
the whole "got mine" thing is really played out...
when going to buy models at the game shop, i simply go with what catches my eye...
that doesn't mean i don't care about other people's perception of value...
i wasn't expecting praise for anything...
i was mistakenly thinking that you and i could have a civil discussion...
you've proven me wrong once again...
I'm more surprised that jah continues to come into these threads and proclaim his love of all things GW, and then refuses to ever see anyone else's point.
Warhammer brand to expand into new licensed categories after 2016 success.
UK tabletop games company – Games Workshop – has seen its move into the licensing space with its Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 brands begin to reap rewards.
The designer, manufacturer and retailer of tabletop battle games and miniatures saw significant growth in its licensing activity during 2016, and it is now eyeing further expansion for 2017.
Licensed products worth an estimated $109 million at retail were sold during the period from November 2015 to November 2016, principally from the company’s successful stable of licensed video games and apps.
These categories were augmented by new lines of licensed giftware, apparel, high-end art prints, accessories and comic books, with the early performance being promising.
Moving into 2017, limited edition statues, drinkware, computer accessories, time pieces and footwear are all headed to market in addition to the highly anticipated release of Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III, the latest entry in the seven million plus selling video game franchise.
Games Workshop is also set to exhibit at US Toy Fair in New York later this month, as well as at Licensing Expo in May.
Jon Gillard, head of licensing for Games Workshop, commented: “It’s been a great year for our licensed products, with numerous best-selling video games leading the charge.
“Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 are world class IPs that have been around for over 30 years, during which time Games Workshop has released tens of thousands of products, and we feel sure we will continue to see huge success for the Warhammer brand as we move into new categories of licensing.”
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
You know how they do those "hulk hands" for Marvel yeah ?
I'm thinking something like that but with ork feet.
Or a necron wraith onesie .
Or a Slaanesh themed breastfeeding kit.
Or "Primarch Pampers" for the 40k offspring.
Think there's probably a market for a Hopkins style Witch-hunter hat too.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You know, IP retention has always been the big hurdle between us and a GW movie...
Could we be seeing that in years to come?
Considering the GW licensed games tend to completely ignore all the wonderful fiction in favour of "for the emperor" on an endless loop, I'd rather they didn't make a 40k movie.
There’s a difference between having a hobby and being a narcissist.
I think there is a whole untapped market in the US making GW licensed weaponry. Who wouldn't like to own a real size bolter with explosive bullets (A shortened Ma deuce would work i think)
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You know, IP retention has always been the big hurdle between us and a GW movie...
Could we be seeing that in years to come?
Considering the GW licensed games tend to completely ignore all the wonderful fiction in favour of "for the emperor" on an endless loop, I'd rather they didn't make a 40k movie.
A Hollywood version of 40K? I don't know. Like can it actually get any worse than the Ultramarine movie? I don't think so, but it can just be as bad. It would be like New Star Trek lore compared to Old Star Trek. Totally different but in name only.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/13 13:33:24
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You know, IP retention has always been the big hurdle between us and a GW movie...
Could we be seeing that in years to come?
Considering the GW licensed games tend to completely ignore all the wonderful fiction in favour of "for the emperor" on an endless loop, I'd rather they didn't make a 40k movie.
A Hollywood version of 40K? I don't know. Like can it actually get any worse than the Ultramarine movie? I don't think so, but it can just be as bad. It would be like New Star Trek lore compared to Old Star Trek. Totally different but in name only.
Transformers movies are bad (even the animated one, despite it being a cult classic and a personal favourite). Yet also profitable. Marvel's works aren't great examples of cinema, yet massively popular and profitable.
Personally, I don't think you can film 40k, on account it's ludicrously violent (imagine a Bolter on screen...) yet to cut that down or out entirely completely misses the point of 40k. But if it's a revenue stream waiting to be exploited, who knows what we might see?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Herzlos wrote: There's plenty of things that are worse in terms of violence. It wouldn't be that far off something like Starship Troopers or Dredd.
You could probably do some awesome Anime or gore film.
But why would you set it in the 40K universe? You can do the same sort of spacemen Vs aliens thing without having to pay GW anything.
I think most adaptations come about for two main reasons:
1. Somebody with the movie business clout and/ or money loves a property and wants it made.
2. Somebody with the above clout has no idea about the IP but, as it's popular, thinks they can make a shed load of cash out of it, even if they completely change settings, motivations, characters and so on.
As examples, see both Dredd movies (without watching the Stallone one if you can help it).
I'm just glad at the moment that no-one has got around to attempting a Rogue Trooper movie.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You know, IP retention has always been the big hurdle between us and a GW movie...
Could we be seeing that in years to come?
Considering the GW licensed games tend to completely ignore all the wonderful fiction in favour of "for the emperor" on an endless loop, I'd rather they didn't make a 40k movie.
A Hollywood version of 40K? I don't know. Like can it actually get any worse than the Ultramarine movie? I don't think so, but it can just be as bad. It would be like New Star Trek lore compared to Old Star Trek. Totally different but in name only.
Transformers movies are bad (even the animated one, despite it being a cult classic and a personal favourite). Yet also profitable. Marvel's works aren't great examples of cinema, yet massively popular and profitable.
Personally, I don't think you can film 40k, on account it's ludicrously violent (imagine a Bolter on screen...) yet to cut that down or out entirely completely misses the point of 40k. But if it's a revenue stream waiting to be exploited, who knows what we might see?
Me and the family love the Transformer movies.
As much as I hate to say it, I think we would need Michael Bay to make a 40K movie. At least he will get the explosions and the over the topness of 40K correctly. Or maybe even James Cameron.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
Herzlos wrote: There's plenty of things that are worse in terms of violence. It wouldn't be that far off something like Starship Troopers or Dredd.
You could probably do some awesome Anime or gore film.
But why would you set it in the 40K universe? You can do the same sort of spacemen Vs aliens thing without having to pay GW anything.
I pretty much entirely disagree.
Why did the makers of Starship Troopers and Dredd (awesome film!) make those, instead of Spacemen vs Aliens and Future Cop vs Generic Druggies?
As for levels of violence, I think you're underestimating the near comical levels of violence involved in 40k. Lasguns cause horrific burns - enough to kill or incapacitate through shock. Fleshborers? Beetle that eat their target alive. Bolters? internal detonation means body parts everywhere. Shuriken or Gauss? Targets flayed alive in two very different ways. Orks? Dear God such violence - chopping, shooting, stomping, head butting. Chainswords? Body parts everywhere, those unlucky enough to survive the initial slash will have chunks of their body ripped asunder. Space Marines are described as casually back handing renegade Guardsmen wearing helmets, and turning their skulls to paste.
No censor would ever, ever pass that. They couldn't. And you can't take the body horror out of 40k, without it turning out like Stallone's Judge Dredd, where it wears the badge but completely and utterly misses the point.
Now don't get me wrong. I'm not a prude. I'm certainly no Mary Whitehouse. I love my gore in movies. I usually find it laughable, no matter how well it's done. But 40k is something completely....other. Marines are terror troops. Their very weapons and total lack of camouflage is there to terrorise the enemy - your squadmates are detonating around you. Your shots are hitting, but they're not slowing. One of them is missing an arm....but he's still coming at you, killing all the time with inhuman precision.
You cannot film 40k
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Why did the makers of Starship Troopers and Dredd (awesome film!) make those, instead of Spacemen vs Aliens and Future Cop vs Generic Druggies?
As for levels of violence, I think you're underestimating the near comical levels of violence involved in 40k. Lasguns cause horrific burns - enough to kill or incapacitate through shock. Fleshborers? Beetle that eat their target alive. Bolters? internal detonation means body parts everywhere. Shuriken or Gauss? Targets flayed alive in two very different ways. Orks? Dear God such violence - chopping, shooting, stomping, head butting. Chainswords? Body parts everywhere, those unlucky enough to survive the initial slash will have chunks of their body ripped asunder. Space Marines are described as casually back handing renegade Guardsmen wearing helmets, and turning their skulls to paste.
No censor would ever, ever pass that. They couldn't. And you can't take the body horror out of 40k, without it turning out like Stallone's Judge Dredd, where it wears the badge but completely and utterly misses the point.
Now don't get me wrong. I'm not a prude. I'm certainly no Mary Whitehouse. I love my gore in movies. I usually find it laughable, no matter how well it's done. But 40k is something completely....other. Marines are terror troops. Their very weapons and total lack of camouflage is there to terrorise the enemy - your squadmates are detonating around you. Your shots are hitting, but they're not slowing. One of them is missing an arm....but he's still coming at you, killing all the time with inhuman precision.
You cannot film 40k
And yet they sell this game to 8 year olds.
So if they can sell it to 8 year olds, they can make a movie out it. Doesn't mean it will be good though. Hollywood has a tendency to screw up what they touch. Just look at Marvel comic movies. They look nothing like they do in the comics.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/13 21:19:09
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
