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.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Whilst its a fair point many companies (admittedly more in video-games) splurge vast moneys on stuff nobody asked for like Hair physics or Fallout licensing and then site rising costs and apathetic consumers when said project falls flat,

Funny bit. A big reason Japan's gaming industry struggled to jump to the HD era was due to difficulties translating anime hair. Bald space marines really helped western companies pull ahead.

That said, as someone who really loves videogames for outlandish character designs, I'm glad the industry has continued to push working hair models and not settled on bland, but efficient character designs that gave us years in which the industry really didn't generate any memorable characters.

I'd rather they went back to characters memorable for their personalities/actions, and not for stupid hair and big swords.

insaniak wrote:It's not just the 'older' players who try to find ways to save money on their hobbies. I built dreadnoughts and a rhino out of cardboard back when I was getting starting, because the actual models were simply out of my reach. 20 years later, I'm much more inclined to just buy the model if I like it.

This is my take as well. It's generally the whippersnappers trying to find ways around paying money. Older players will generally pay money... or do without if the book or product doesn't have much redeeming quality. Well, sometimes. The amount of money companies make off of cheap nostalgia garbage is fairly horrifying, especially from people who should know better. <cough>robotech<cough>

I've seen gamers drop $500 on new armies on a relative whim, so in a lot of cases it's not a lack of cash (I was the same at one point but it's now a lack of cash). It's more about value; why should I spend $10 on a plastic tank when I can get one that's as good for $5?

Why pay $40 for that box of cards and skellies when I have 100 skellies in a box already?

 whatwhat wrote:
That works both ways though. If the consumer would like that business to remain healthy then they should patronise it. For example, the much loved independent hight street bike shop which went bust because all their customers did was look and buy online, that's quite typical these days.

Another example of that is how retail electronics chains are complaining that sales are down, and speculation has similarly been put forward that people are using their showrooms to see products (example: TVs) in person and then buying off Amazon or other online retailers.

I do agree with supporting companies that make things I like. Whether that's occasionally buying a song I like off iTunes rather than just using Youtube/Spotify to listen to it, or getting a DVD/box set of a movie or show I like, or buying Cards Against Humanity packs rather than cheaper knockoffs or using the dozens of blank cards I've accrued to make my own version of their work for free (instead I use those for personalized cards, which aren't quite as funny as I'd hoped, it's a work in progress).

That said, there's nothing wrong with being a savvy consumer, as we all have limited resources to work with (even if some of those limits are much greater than others). So I wait for Steam sales for most of my game purchases, make larger purchases in general during expected discount periods (I've put off buying a PS4 for a month or two to get in on Black Friday sales, for example). Companies aren't owed our money or patronage in general, so they have to get creative. Want to inspire people to use your models? Come up with ways to incentivize that. Some like tournaments requiring no proxies and limited conversions is a common choice I've seen, but that won't stop casual players (and might disincentivize them from trying the competitive/larger community aspects of the game), so have points systems where UPC codes can be traded for limited edition models, or include something in the box that's a little extra, or any number of creative perks/bonuses that companies have come up with.

It's not about consumers being demanding and cheap and entitled and jaded or whatever, at least not necessarily (some certainly are all of the above), but especially with a market that has existing products that can fulfill the same role, as well or better, at a cheaper cost, and possibly a higher availability, there needs to be more reasons to spend money on X instead of Y.

I don't think it's that we don't want to spend ANY money, but I for one want to get value for my spend. There are also opposing arguments going on in my own head.

I'm sure Shadespire is a great game. I might pick it up; I might not. It's being touted as a competitive fast game, and the price isn't stupid. On the other hand, I'm not exactly short of figures, so I only need the cards & rules. £40 for a ruleset (compared to a codex at £25-£30) suddenly doesn't look quite so attractive. Looking at it the other way, as I've done with Calth, going for the models and looking at the rules as a bonus/freebie, 8 figures pretty much duplicating what I already have for £40 is a no brainer - no thanks!

So - yes - maybe I am being "cheap" - but - it's not a purchase I "need", so, if I could pick it up cheaper - why not?

 daedalus wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
People seem to be developing a really weird relationship with corporations these days.

It's not that weird. You see that kind of behavior in most abusive relationships.

Nod. Remember the Nintendo vs Sega Wars? You may have seen the more modern version of Microsoft vs Sony. Here in Australia we have Ford vs Holden (cars) and anyone, anywhere can take a related example with <local or not-so-local professional sports team>.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Yes, the rule book purchase is a shot in the arm for the company and helps get their rule set exposed to other eyes, but generally speaking, the profit margins on rule books aren't as great as other items (like miniatures). Many companies have a business model of selling rules as a loss leader, or even giving them away for free, as a way to encourage miniature sales. Granted, this is only relevant to companies who offer both rules and miniatures, as many companies offer rule sets without an associated miniature line so those sorts of companies aren't part of this business model. But when a company does offer miniatures they are hoping you will buy them. The success of their company is built into that.
...
What I am saying is if a player likes a company/rule set/setting and likes the models for that game, but opts to use "good enough" stand-in models which cost less, then buying the cheaper option while still buying just the rule book isn't doing the company/rule set/setting any favors. While a rule book and a box of miniatures are "unconnected purchases" in terms of product type, they are very much connected in terms of the company's business model.

I bought GW's much-more expensive models for many of my Kings of War armies because a lot of Mantic's models are gak.

More generally and returning to the OP, if I am understanding the OP's post, then this frugal behavior on the customer's part is problematic because if the customer likes the rule system/setting of a game, but doesn't support the company through repeated purchases, the company will fold. Which I generally agree with.
...
Since people didn't like the games OP referenced I'll add another.

Games companies aren't charities, and so I quite happily buy what I want from who I want for the whichever games I want to use them in without feeling a shred of obligation to any games company, or guilt or remorse for not buying "official" models of any kind. Which would be odd emotions to feel when buying models to paint and play toy soldiers with.

I don't see it as problematic. It's capitalism. If a product is good enough appealing to a wide enough audience at an appealing price, it'll sell.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 stanman wrote:

I think gamers tend to complain too much about costs in some regard because they moan about the cost of a game (say $100) which will provide options for repeat enjoyment but will spend the same amount of money or more going out for drinks or food without so much as a grumble and that's a one time experience. I think most people just want to complain about something.

Who are you to quantify how others should value a night out with friends or loved ones when compared to some toy soldiers or a game? Different people value different things differently, and your rather silly generalisations are not useful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I completely agree, but I think the issue is that the players turn around and complain if the company/game goes under.
For example, let's use Legion. Let's say a player pirates the rules, then buys a whole ton of Star Wars figs from another manufacturer (no idea if this is possible but it preserves the example).
They play the crap out of legion, it's fun & awesome, and they spend more money on these non-FFG figs and more time on the game, etc.
Then, FFG pulls the game out from under them because it's unprofitable for FFG to support it.
Then, said player whines and complains and calls FFG dumb for pulling the plug.

The Legion player in your example, in one aspect is the same as me. Because I'm not buying any Legion stuff from FFG either - so FFG makes no money from either of us.

On the other hand, that example Legion player no doubt plays with others, and some of them must have the official figures and rules and counters and crap, so he's part of a community - so he's supporting the game simply by playing it, so FFG tangentially makes a bit of money off his activity due to his contribution to the Legion community.
As opposed to someone like me, not buying or playing Legion, and instead playing 40k or videogames instead of Legion - and adding nothing at all to the Legion community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
FWIW, minis games and videogames suffer from similar problems of rising development costs for products whose prices are more or less at the ceiling of what the market is willing to pay. Companies are largely looking for ways to fund quality improvements to gain a competitive advantage without really being able to directly charge for it. Some companies have found good ways to raise these funds... others have found good ways to exploit their customers...

Whilst its a fair point many companies (admittedly more in video-games) splurge vast moneys on stuff nobody asked for like Hair physics or Fallout licensing and then site rising costs and apathetic consumers when said project falls flat,

Someone listens to the Jimquisition, I see. But to be fair, I started playing MA: Andromeda today, and there are noticeable places where I wonder how they fethed up the hair so badly when it's vibrating and clipping through itself and Cora's head while she stands there, not moving around and just talking at me. That game could have used some better quality hair physics. Folded arms of NPCs in conversation clipping through themselves? In a AAA title in 2017 that was in development for 5 or so years? How the feth?

I think I must have "graphics blindness" or something because I never noticed anything like that in ME:A, and I didn't even think it looked bad when the games press was printing acres of hysterical articles about the lead character having a slight smirk and the eye shaders not being shiny enough or whatever.

Regardless, my reason for initially bringing up this strand of discussion was to emphasise that one big reason costs are rising for game development is needless duplication of effort driven by vanity & ego rather than necessity or consumer demand; not "hair physics are silly" but "developing your own hair physics engine-addon at a cost of hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars when multiple perfectly-functional and often better in the end alternatives could be licensed for a fraction of the cost unnecessarily inflates the cost of development". And the same applies for a lot of stuff that games devs make from scratch when there was no need to.

Of course I listen to Jim, us sturdy grumpy blowhards got to stick together

Yodhrin covers the rising cost point more succinctly than my original jab at floppy vs Lego hair et al

 Azazelx wrote:
In a AAA title in 2017 that was in development for 5 or so years? How the feth?

Not to get too far astray, but from everything I've read, they threw out a lot of the early work, and what we received in the form of ME:A represented maybe 1.5 years of effort, start to finish.

Obviously that doesn't excuse the flaws present in the product. Though I do think The Internet lost its mind while looking for things to hate about the game at launch, a month later when I finally had the time to dig in, most of the issues people were declaring affronts to gaming and possibly crimes against humanity were mostly taken care of.

That said, I actually just accept that people's arms/armor are probably going to clip a little. Yes, even in AAA titles. If getting attire/hair/etc physics and clipping perfect is going to add to an already inflated budget and likely months or more to release dates (or cause other aspects to be reduced or chopped to make up the difference), I'll take 95% over some substantially lower number.

But I do respect that it's entirely subjective, and that for some a loss of immersion in what should be a very immersive hobby is a dealbreaker. Much as I love what Bioware does, I would never proclaim them perfect or without room for improvement.

In the end, the issue is the word 'appear'. The gamer who buys rules... and then uses different minis because they're cheaper, or better, or because he already owns appropriate minis only 'appears' to be cheap. The reality is, the minis sold by the game designer do not fit the need of the consumer. Either he has plenty to use already, or he thinks the other minis he buys are superior value for the money.

This is not being cheap. This is being an educated consumer.

I'm not cheap, but I'm sure as hell frugal. I like buying most of my models either secondhand or as bitz on Ebay nowadays. Like for instance, I am probably going to get some of the Stormcast from the Blightwar starter instead of the standard kits. But why spend 60 US on a trio of Vanguard Palladors (the ones on griffons) when you can get a sprue of the same three on Ebay for 25 bucks shipped? I also made great use of the Toledo Games Store at Gencon to buy loads of single figures for 1/3 the price of what they would be in a boxed set, like Savage Orruks for 2 dollars each.

Or when I was on the hedge about whether I wanted to get into Star Wars Armada, but only finally did so when I saw a 50% off sale online and was able to get 200 dollars of stuff for 110?

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm not cheap, but I'm sure as hell frugal. I like buying most of my models either secondhand or as bitz on Ebay nowadays. Like for instance, I am probably going to get some of the Stormcast from the Blightwar starter instead of the standard kits. But why spend 60 US on a trio of Vanguard Palladors (the ones on griffons) when you can get a sprue of the same three on Ebay for 25 bucks shipped? I also made great use of the Toledo Games Store at Gencon to buy loads of single figures for 1/3 the price of what they would be in a boxed set, like Savage Orruks for 2 dollars each.

Or when I was on the hedge about whether I wanted to get into Star Wars Armada, but only finally did so when I saw a 50% off sale online and was able to get 200 dollars of stuff for 110?

A couple of notes...

I was also on the hedge about Star Wars Armada. Fortunately, Barnes & Noble sells a lot of these sort of FFG core games/expansions in the store near me. I waited for a 40% off coupon, stacked with my 10% off membership and no sales tax in my home state to get the $99.95 core box for $53.97 (the discounts are applied sequentially, so the 10% off is really only and extra 6% off the full price). I get a 40% off coupon about once every 3 months and a 15%-25% off coupon the other months. Whenever I see the 40% off coupon, I use it. I can't remember the last time I bought something at full price there.

I pretty frequently go to two different FLGS's. For something like Warhammer AoS/40k, Store A offers a flat 20% off, but has a 6% sales tax. A $100 item would end up costing me $84.80, which is an effective 15% discount. Store B offers no discount and is in my home state, so no tax... but does give you a $75 store gift certificate for every $500 spent on Game Workshop product. This means that I'm spending $500 to get $575 worth of product, which is an effective 13% discount. The discount is a little less, but can be applied to anything in the store. It also requires that I spend $500 to 'unlock' the discount. I play more often in Store A and it has the better discount, so I tend to buy more there. Store B is closer and is good for when I need a pot of paint or want a unit NOW for a game tomorrow.

Getting a deal increases your purchase value. I'm not cheap, but I'd also prefer to pay less for literally anything I buy. When I go food shopping, if ground turkey is on sale and beef isn't... well, it looks like Turkey Taco Tuesday this week. The only time I pay full price for gaming stuff is via Amazon, using change from my change jar. I throw all my change into a jar when I get home. When the jar is full, I take it to one of those coin counting machines. If you want cash from the machine, it takes a 9% cut, which seems insane. If you're willing to take an Amazon gift card, there is no cut. You get full value. I do that. The change jar is essentially "written off money", so while I understand that I'm just buying a gift card, it feels like I'm getting a gift card for free by cleaning out my change jar. I usually get between $50-150 when I cash in the jar. I'm always shocked by how much I have in change laying around. I use those cards for random things I normally wouldn't buy with any excess going into 3D printer filament. The last time I did this, I picked up a board game (Rivet Wars: Eastern Front), 2x Lord of the Rings LCG adventure packs, some 3D printer filament and a pair of Bluetooth headphones. It felt like a free box of goodies in that I didn't have to take cash out of an ATM and my bank account balance didn't change.

TLDR; I'm not cheap, but I do like to maximize the value in my purchases. I do this either by getting discounts or by using money that I perceive as 'already spent'.

 Kriswall wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm not cheap, but I'm sure as hell frugal. I like buying most of my models either secondhand or as bitz on Ebay nowadays. Like for instance, I am probably going to get some of the Stormcast from the Blightwar starter instead of the standard kits. But why spend 60 US on a trio of Vanguard Palladors (the ones on griffons) when you can get a sprue of the same three on Ebay for 25 bucks shipped? I also made great use of the Toledo Games Store at Gencon to buy loads of single figures for 1/3 the price of what they would be in a boxed set, like Savage Orruks for 2 dollars each.

Or when I was on the hedge about whether I wanted to get into Star Wars Armada, but only finally did so when I saw a 50% off sale online and was able to get 200 dollars of stuff for 110?

A couple of notes...

I was also on the hedge about Star Wars Armada. Fortunately, Barnes & Noble sells a lot of these sort of FFG core games/expansions in the store near me. I waited for a 40% off coupon, stacked with my 10% off membership and no sales tax in my home state to get the $99.95 core box for $53.97 (the discounts are applied sequentially, so the 10% off is really only and extra 6% off the full price). I get a 40% off coupon about once every 3 months and a 15%-25% off coupon the other months. Whenever I see the 40% off coupon, I use it. I can't remember the last time I bought something at full price there.

I pretty frequently go to two different FLGS's. For something like Warhammer AoS/40k, Store A offers a flat 20% off, but has a 6% sales tax. A $100 item would end up costing me $84.80, which is an effective 15% discount. Store B offers no discount and is in my home state, so no tax... but does give you a $75 store gift certificate for every $500 spent on Game Workshop product. This means that I'm spending $500 to get $575 worth of product, which is an effective 13% discount. The discount is a little less, but can be applied to anything in the store. It also requires that I spend $500 to 'unlock' the discount. I play more often in Store A and it has the better discount, so I tend to buy more there. Store B is closer and is good for when I need a pot of paint or want a unit NOW for a game tomorrow.

Getting a deal increases your purchase value. I'm not cheap, but I'd also prefer to pay less for literally anything I buy. When I go food shopping, if ground turkey is on sale and beef isn't... well, it looks like Turkey Taco Tuesday this week. The only time I pay full price for gaming stuff is via Amazon, using change from my change jar. I throw all my change into a jar when I get home. When the jar is full, I take it to one of those coin counting machines. If you want cash from the machine, it takes a 9% cut, which seems insane. If you're willing to take an Amazon gift card, there is no cut. You get full value. I do that. The change jar is essentially "written off money", so while I understand that I'm just buying a gift card, it feels like I'm getting a gift card for free by cleaning out my change jar. I usually get between $50-150 when I cash in the jar. I'm always shocked by how much I have in change laying around. I use those cards for random things I normally wouldn't buy with any excess going into 3D printer filament. The last time I did this, I picked up a board game (Rivet Wars: Eastern Front), 2x Lord of the Rings LCG adventure packs, some 3D printer filament and a pair of Bluetooth headphones. It felt like a free box of goodies in that I didn't have to take cash out of an ATM and my bank account balance didn't change.

TLDR; I'm not cheap, but I do like to maximize the value in my purchases. I do this either by getting discounts or by using money that I perceive as 'already spent'.

I am finally replying. The above is not what I am talking about...and is actually still supporting all the games you plan to play (and I encourage this). I am more talking about those that are surprised when a game they like goes under because the company is not getting any support....and they are talking about using existing models, printing their own cards, downloading the rules, printing their own boards etc. Shadespire is the perfect example...people actually proposing printing your their boards and cards...as well as using their existing models, that are not part of the game...but want to enjoy the game. These are the games I refer too...and maybe it is just their forum that brings them out, and hopefully the majority of us shop smart...but still shop to promote and support the games we want to play now, in the future, and share with others.

You're replying, but didn't actually respond to the criticisms of your OP. Again - why is it the customer's responsibility to give a company money if they don't see the value proposition? And how can you claim someone playing the game - thus providing opponents and word-of-mouth/social media advertising for it - isn't promoting and supporting said game when they self-evidently are even if they don't give the producer a single penny of their own money or buy only a rulebook?

No..as they are giving nothing for a game they want to enjoy...they are providing others the way and means to bypass paying as well....Its ok not to support a game or even play with proxy to see if you will like it...I feel its cheap to want a game to be good, strive, and grow when you are unwilling to support it with your money.

Those that like Shadespire..want to see future expansions, but print out the boards and cards...and then use their existing models are cheap players.

Now the insults can come my way...I can take it.

PS - not going to respond much more as it may be considered breaking the rules somehow...and I don't want to get banned.

100BostonFan wrote:
I am more talking about those that are surprised when a game they like goes under because the company is not getting any support....and they are talking about using existing models, printing their own cards, downloading the rules, printing their own boards etc.

The thing is, your thread title paints the entire community with a very broad brush, when the above here applies to a very, very small group of people. If they exist at all.

I doubt that many people at all would be honestly surprised when a game that people aren't supporting gets discontinued.

 Elbows wrote:

The overwhelming thing to remember is that games like 40K and Star Wars based franchises have a huge market in 14-22 year olds. Poor high school kids or cheap college kids, etc. While wargaming is not, compared to other things, an expensive hobby...it can be when you're on a shoe string budget but want (colloquially) "All the things".
.

/Thread

100BostonFan wrote:
I feel its cheap to want a game to be good, strive, and grow when you are unwilling to support it with your money..

You still have this backwards.


I want the Justice League movie to be good. If it's not good enough for me to be interested in paying money to see it, I won't bother paying money to see it... I'll just wait for it to make it to free-to-air TV, or borrow the DVD from a friend.

Games are no different. If a company offers a product that players like enough to support, then they will support it. It's not up to the players to throw money at the game producer to encourage them to produce a better product.


If you like a game and want to support it, that's great. If someone else enjoys playing a game, but doesn't want to or can't afford to buy stuff to play it, well, that's also great - because more people playing a game is also a good thing for the gaming community. If the game is hugely popular but nobody is actually spending any money on it... well then that's a clear sign that the company making the game is doing something wrong. Nothing to do with people being 'cheap'.

I'm very much of the opinion that as a hobbyist I can buy or not buy whatever I damn well want to. I will purchase minis and rules on a regular basis with part of the limited (£50 to £70) budget I allow myself every month for entertainment purposes. With such a small budget I have to be careful to get good value for money, I look at that in multiple ways but it does boil down to how much fun will I get from this purchase. As such I look for miniatures and rulesets with multiple uses. In other words minis that are easily used with more than one ruleset and rules that can be used with multiple settings or time periods. If looking to get multiple uses out of my purchases makes me "cheap" then I embrace that but I think that I'm just sensible and looking for the best value for money that I can.

Of course the fact that these days I massively prefer metal miniatures does mean that I have to be even more careful with my money because they can be very expensive in a 1 to 1 comparison with plastics but that's a subject for a different thread.

I think it all boils down to "reward good behavior".

Make good product: I buy it.

There are some out there that will print on cardstock all the "models" and print out some scanned pdf for rules and not spend a bit of money on the game they play, but I find them as few and far between.
I find they tend to play the net lists since the personal effort and investment is that much less to build your army (and maybe a an old grognard used to playing with gaming chits).

I have a friend that bought all his miniatures used and made an entire armored company of space marines.
That was very cheap, but a TON of work.

Cheap? Maybe to do with specific games but if you add up EVERYTHING these miniature gamers on these forum boards play: there would be nothing cheap about their spending at all.
How many people have every model of a given faction in a given game?
More than I think people would believe.

 insaniak wrote:

100BostonFan wrote:
I feel its cheap to want a game to be good, strive, and grow when you are unwilling to support it with your money..

You still have this backwards.


I want the Justice League movie to be good. If it's not good enough for me to be interested in paying money to see it, I won't bother paying money to see it... I'll just wait for it to make it to free-to-air TV, or borrow the DVD from a friend.

Games are no different. If a company offers a product that players like enough to support, then they will support it. It's not up to the players to throw money at the game producer to encourage them to produce a better product.


If you like a game and want to support it, that's great. If someone else enjoys playing a game, but doesn't want to or can't afford to buy stuff to play it, well, that's also great - because more people playing a game is also a good thing for the gaming community. If the game is hugely popular but nobody is actually spending any money on it... well then that's a clear sign that the company making the game is doing something wrong. Nothing to do with people being 'cheap'.

You dont watch a movies from a gak producer or company in the hopes that the money you give will some how make them better and better.

Wargamers, on the whole, aren't particularly cheap. However, unlike a lot of hobbies of similar depth, it's possible to be involved for cheap. For example, if your hobby is golf, you have to have your own clubs, and balls, and greens fees. You can shave some money off here and there, but there's simply a floor. Wargaming allows, at least in theory, an amazing amount of creative ability to game for cheap to free. It's possible, so you get some people doing it.

In other words, it's not that wargamers are inherently cheap, but those that are cheap are both very cheap, and surprisingly vocal about it.

beowulfhunter wrote:
You think wargamers are cheap, try interacting with RPG players. We have a group who pirate their pdfs, bringvthier own snacks to avoid buying from the store, and bawk at paying a few bucks a person to play.

There's something vaguely embarrassing about seeing gaming groups at the FLGS. I've seldom seen a group playing at the store hat were anything other than grotesque caricatures of every gaming stereotype.

 Polonius wrote:

There's something vaguely embarrassing about seeing gaming groups at the FLGS. I've seldom seen a group playing at the store hat were anything other than grotesque caricatures of every gaming stereotype.

Yeah. Not sure what that is that's going on there, but it's something I've noticed too.

 daedalus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

There's something vaguely embarrassing about seeing gaming groups at the FLGS. I've seldom seen a group playing at the store hat were anything other than grotesque caricatures of every gaming stereotype.

Yeah. Not sure what that is that's going on there, but it's something I've noticed too.

I mean, nobody looks cool while roleplaying. I get that. But when I see an adult pathfinder group at a store, I know exactly what I'll see: giant fat guy, smelly guy, creepy guy, super annoying voice guy/girl, and nonstop sexual innuendo guy/girl. It's like something out of central casting.

 Polonius wrote:

I mean, nobody looks cool while roleplaying. I get that. But when I see an adult pathfinder group at a store, I know exactly what I'll see: giant fat guy, smelly guy, creepy guy, super annoying voice guy/girl, and nonstop sexual innuendo guy/girl. It's like something out of central casting.

That's basically the perfect stereotype.

I think about my group (who sticks to basements and kitchen tables) and we tick off giant fat guy, and one guy who's like, half-way the nonstop sexual innuendo guy.

I don't think there's anyone who's "creepy guy", though giant fat guy likes his characters to be a bit too much into torture, which could probably fall into creepy sometimes.

I'm kinda monotone, so I'm probably super annoying voice guy if there is one, depending on the situation. No one's ever complained though.

I am pretty proud to that that we are 100% smelly guy free though!

I will will admit to copying and printing some of my own cards for Armada and Xwing. But then again I am typically buying as much product as two people, as I end up having to host my minis games to get any play out of them. And frankly, when you get right down to it, it is not any more damaging to FFG than buying secondhand GW models, which is commonly accepted.

100BostonFan wrote:
No..as they are giving nothing for a game they want to enjoy...they are providing others the way and means to bypass paying as well....Its ok not to support a game or even play with proxy to see if you will like it...I feel its cheap to want a game to be good, strive, and grow when you are unwilling to support it with your money.

Those that like Shadespire..want to see future expansions, but print out the boards and cards...and then use their existing models are cheap players.

Is it the fault of the gamer, or for GW for producing a game they don't want to buy? I mean, presumably most of these "print out the boards and cards" players are doing so because they want the game but don't value the bundled minis, and would buy it if it was available in a rules-only format. The starter pack contains Stormcast and Korne Bloodbound - something that anyone who bought AoS already has, and with the Stormcast at least, are deeply unpopular across the fanbase.

The game is £40 here, which is a lot of money if you don't want the bundled warbands. If they had the base game (no warbands minis/cards) for £20 I'm sure a lot of those "print and play" players would buy it.

Shadespire is an interesting example, putting aside my doubts tha GW rules drones are capable of developing a tightly balanced game a la MTG or Hearthstone

I was tempted but have no urge to buy mini's I don't need for cards I do, X-Wing has already shown that isn't consumer friendly

But offer me the rules and card packs every so often (and maybe some nice neoprene playmats as cardboard is yuck) and I'll most likely give it a whirl,

The thing about FFG, is that they started out as a board games company, and has remained primarily a board games company to this day. Most board game companies only do one production run of each game, and then sells the game until they run out of stock. FFG has more than one leg to stand on, unlike most miniatures companies, and will stop marketing and manufacturing a game as soon as it stops being profitable. Then there's also the matter of IP licenses, as we saw last year, when GW didn't renew their licence with FFG. In the past, FFG has abruptly discontinued other board games with miniatures, particularly Battle Lore, which was likely unprofitable due to production costs, yet despite that, Battle Lore was well received and has a large following.

Personally, I've spent so much money on FW that I'd rather not think about it, but I have a Krieg army which amounts to at least 3000 points, yet I still haven't bought the 8th edition rulebook. Not because I don't play, but because I'd rather purchase it as a softcover, and until that happens all I really need is the PDF they released for free and my 8th edtion FW index.

So, OP fess up. Why did you change the title?

Ruin wrote:
So, OP fess up. Why did you change the title?

Maybe he recognized that people on Dakka are not exclusively cheap?
Though with well over 5000 postings, I really should donate to this board.