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.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
what GW did after the lawsuit and their conclusion on the case is not really based on what actual happened

GW took that route because it was their way of dealing with the result that everyone can sell 28mm plastic "Dwarfs" but only GW can sell Duradin and Fyreslayer

The names are to do with the trademark side of things, the look of the actual miniatures is something that is protected in their actual depiction/realization of an idea, but the underlying ideas of them are not something they own. Other manufacturers can make Dwarfs with similar themes as long as they aren't too similar to the actual GW miniatures. Changing the themes of the WHFB miniatures with this project wouldn't matter, because that's not what the copyright protects.

right, but this would mean GW understand Copyright and Trademark, and for what we have seen in the past, they do not

they would change everything just because they feel the need to do it to protect something that does not need protection while others can still sell similar stuff as "Airship Dwarf Pirates" is nothing they can Copyright

 kodos wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
what GW did after the lawsuit and their conclusion on the case is not really based on what actual happened

GW took that route because it was their way of dealing with the result that everyone can sell 28mm plastic "Dwarfs" but only GW can sell Duradin and Fyreslayer

The names are to do with the trademark side of things, the look of the actual miniatures is something that is protected in their actual depiction/realization of an idea, but the underlying ideas of them are not something they own. Other manufacturers can make Dwarfs with similar themes as long as they aren't too similar to the actual GW miniatures. Changing the themes of the WHFB miniatures with this project wouldn't matter, because that's not what the copyright protects.

right, but this would mean GW understand Copyright and Trademark, and for what we have seen in the past, they do not

they would change everything just because they feel the need to do it to protect something that does not need protection while others can still sell similar stuff as "Airship Dwarf Pirates" is nothing they can Copyright

I feel like this is just baseless speculation rather than something with anything to back it up though. The trademark side of things with the more unique names for stuff is obviously something they've done, which is absolutely fine, so it's not the trademark part that's really relevant to this.

It's the idea of "They're going to make the WHFB factions completely different so they more thematically unique because of the Chapterhouse Lawsuit" that keeps getting repeated when there isn't any actual evidence that that's what's going on at all. It's conflating the more unique models that have resulted from a completely different style of fantasy that came with AoS, with something that is just not how copyright works in the first place, while saying GW doesn't even know what copyright because....what? Because they didn't win in regards to all of those copyright disputes over all of those specific miniatures, when determining infringement is not some easy clear thing? The idea that the new miniatures are the result of them trying to uselessly make their miniature themes more "copyright defendable" because of a lawsuit over half a decade ago and because they don't know that themes and concepts aren't what copyright protects (and even though that lawsuit said that), rather than them just wanting more interesting and unique miniatures as the result of a setting and fantasy style change, just seems absurd.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

I feel like this is just baseless speculation rather than something with anything to back it up though. The trademark side of things with the more unique names for stuff is obviously something they've done, which is absolutely fine, so it's not the trademark part that's really relevant to this.

It's the idea of "They're going to make the WHFB factions completely different so they more thematically unique because of the Chapterhouse Lawsuit" that keeps getting repeated when there isn't any actual evidence that that's what's going on at all. It's conflating the more unique models that have resulted from a completely different style of fantasy that came with AoS, with something that is just not how copyright works in the first place, while saying GW doesn't even know what copyright because....what? Because they didn't win in regards to all of those copyright disputes over all of those specific miniatures, when determining infringement is not some easy clear thing? The idea that the new miniatures are the result of them trying to uselessly make their miniature themes more "copyright defendable" because of a lawsuit over half a decade ago and because they don't know that themes and concepts aren't what copyright protects (and even though that lawsuit said that), rather than them just wanting more interesting and unique miniatures as the result of a setting and fantasy style change, just seems absurd.

Tell that to the new Aempyre vs Skavyn starter set that we'll eventually get.

The aesthetic change isn't for copyright or trademark protection, it's to ape WOW and M:TG in appearance as they try to chase that dragon financially speaking...

 kodos wrote:
what GW did after the lawsuit and their conclusion on the case is not really based on what actual happened

GW took that route because it was their way of dealing with the result that everyone can sell 28mm plastic "Dwarfs" but only GW can sell Duradin and Fyreslayer

My understanding of the outcome of the case was that other companies are allowed to use GW's names to sell their products, they're just not allowed to claim they are those names.

So you're not allowed to sell a "Duradin Fyreslayer" that looks exactly like GW's, but you are allowed to sell a model in a totally unique pose and called "Dwarf Berseker, compatible with GW's Duradin Fyreslayer range". You're not allowed to sell wings that are called "Tyranid Shrike wings", but you are allowed to sell "Monstrous Alien Wings, compatible with GW's Tyranid Warriors".

At least that's my understanding. Having unique names doesn't mean other companies aren't allowed to use those names, they just aren't allowed to use the names in a way that makes it seem like they're making duplicates of those models, or trying to confuse customers into thinking they're selling GW's actual products.

 Overread wrote:
Unique names are also likely because GW realised that if they are the only ones that make Fyreslayers then when you google it most of the results will be GW based models/links etc...

I think that's a possibility, though I don't know how well it works given I misspell the damned names all the time because they're not common words (I misspelled Duradin and Fyre about 4 times while writing this post).

I think they were probably better off someone stumbling across Warhammer by googling "Imperial Guard" than someone having to go out of their way to google "Astra Militarum" to avoid finding out about the Byzantine Excubitors... even now after all these years the majority of google results for "Imperial Guard" are 40k related, and most people who are looking for Imperial Guard for 40k are smart enough to just google "40k Imperial Guard" if they come across the wrong result. It's not like someone looking for GW's Dwarfs are going to google "Dwarf" and go "OMG! Dwarfs exist outside of GW's games!", they're going to know non-GW Dwarfs exist, and alter their google search to "Warhammer Dwarfs" is they don't get the result they want first time.

The Chapterhouse case on paper was mostly a negative for GW, but in the end it probably had the desired effect in that no one wanted to make replacement GW parts after that because even if they're in the right and allowed to, they don't want to have to deal with GW's legal bullying.

I've thought for a while now that 3rd party folks need to make their own game, call it "Battleaxe in the 401st Century", so they can have consistent faction names.

I'm tired of trying to figure out if some 3rd party's "Mecha Empire" line means Tau, Necrons, Imperial knights or Mechanicus.

some games started that way

producing minis to sell as GW alternative but having their own "rules" for legal reasons and to be consistant

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
My understanding of the outcome of the case was that other companies are allowed to use GW's names to sell their products, they're just not allowed to claim they are those names.

So you're not allowed to sell a "Duradin Fyreslayer" that looks exactly like GW's, but you are allowed to sell a model in a totally unique pose and called "Dwarf Berseker, compatible with GW's Duradin Fyreslayer range". You're not allowed to sell wings that are called "Tyranid Shrike wings", but you are allowed to sell "Monstrous Alien Wings, compatible with GW's Tyranid Warriors".

At least that's my understanding. Having unique names doesn't mean other companies aren't allowed to use those names, they just aren't allowed to use the names in a way that makes it seem like they're making duplicates of those models, or trying to confuse customers into thinking they're selling GW's actual products.

And in addition, that GW cannot Trademark generic names like "Imperial Guard" or "Dragon Slayer"

yet GW does always overreact in such cases, like remember when GW removed all kind of fan-fiction from official sources for Copyright reasons or when they wanted that everyone who posts painted minis on the web add "painted by XY, Copyright by GW" to the picture (while the Copyright for the painted Miniature belongs to the one who painted it and not GW and in some countries this would mean that you give the CP to GW for free)

what GW is doing is based on lawsuits or court decisions, but their reaction to it is not the minimum afford but the maximum +strange things that maybe help
changing to Astra Militarum was a reaction to the lawsuit but changes nothing in the case of Chapterhouse but only that people find GW minis when searching the term in Google

Mentlegen324 wrote:
I feel like this is just baseless speculation rather than something with anything to back it up though. The trademark side of things with the more unique names for stuff is obviously something they've done, which is absolutely fine, so it's not the trademark part that's really relevant to this.

well, everything regarding TOW is pure speculation from our side
but Names that can be trademarked are to be expected and with them changes to make things more unique

HRE Lantzknechts are a very common theme and easy to get in plastic, why should one buy the generic GW models if he can have more for less with the same quality and specially in an R&F game were only the first rank need to look good

we won't see State-Troops but more likley "Reiklanders" or "Middenheimers" and they will look more different to historical minis than the old ones

I don't think GW changed the design of their models to prevent others from simply copying them after chapterhouse. I think there are a few aspects to it.

One is that it makes the game look more unique and stand out from other games/manufacturers. With their old more "generic" look it doesn't stand out much from what Mantic and others produce. GW want to be seen as the nr 1 and be distinguishable from the others.

Another reason is that they can now sell the new models to people that already own the old models and people will be more inclined to buy the new stuff rather than get second hand stuff that look very different from the current range. If only a small update in looks people wouldnt bother and might even prefer the older looks. Now they need the new one if they want to keep the aesthetic of their army consistent. Just look at the reboot of the marine range with the Primaris Marines.

And after the above reasons it probably is to make it harder for others to undercut them on prices. GW have the most experience and budget to make detailed plastic kits, others would probably have to contend with resin or metal. Even if other people copy their designs it wont be easy for them to make cheaper versions if they want to stay even close on the amount of detail and weird gak that is on the models now. And if they were to do them the models probably wouldnt be easy to sell to those that want more simple and generic fantasy stuff. It is very easy to make alternative fantasy dwarves to sell to players of many game systems, including WFB. Might even be worth it to get their own molds to make plastic sprues. Not so to make very detailed steam punk dwarves that mostly just AoS players want. They would probably have to be in resin or metal but that will make them costly and more of an alternative for those that want different poses. Not something that would be directly competing with GW on prices.

I think the first 2 reasons are the main ones why they have changed the style to be more "special" the last 10 years, more so the last few years. The last on is more of a bonuses but will diminish with improvements in production for small scale manufacturers, be it resin printers or other methods.

Also the market has changed. Kids of the 80-90s were growing up within the Tolkien directly inspired bubble - today they are growing up with World of Warcraft style fantasy. Things have chagned.

Furthermore with 3D designs and no rank and file GW can do things they couldn't do in the past. The 3D element isn't just changing the nature of poses, but also the nature of cuts on the models. Look at the fiend sprue for Slaanesh, almost every single join line is hidden on the model and the pose is far more dynamic than the old style model. These are things 3D design and top end staff who know how to make good cuts with 3D software and moulds can achieve. GW is pushing the envelope in ways other firms are not and cannot easily do so.

 Overread wrote:
Also the market has changed. Kids of the 80-90s were growing up within the Tolkien directly inspired bubble - today they are growing up with World of Warcraft style fantasy. Things have chagned.

Furthermore with 3D designs and no rank and file GW can do things they couldn't do in the past. The 3D element isn't just changing the nature of poses, but also the nature of cuts on the models. Look at the fiend sprue for Slaanesh, almost every single join line is hidden on the model and the pose is far more dynamic than the old style model. These are things 3D design and top end staff who know how to make good cuts with 3D software and moulds can achieve. GW is pushing the envelope in ways other firms are not and cannot easily do so.

Those kids that grow up in the 2000s sure do love Total Warhammer . Jeez, boomers need to get it into their skulls that perhaps maybe those nerdy bois and girls of the new age actually like the old stuff that came before in an increasing number.

I also wouldnt say every sculpt theyve done has proven such. Sister went from monopose pewterwith some options to monopose plastic. Amazing, wow. All their new improvements have done is to make the sprue as confusing as ever in a way to prevent recasters.

It also completely ignores that the single biggest cultural juggernaut of the past decade was Game of Thrones, a very distinctly low/gritty fantasy that appealed because a lot of it felt grounded and realistic.

Let's not forget the massive success of Dark Souls either which avoids the bright cartoonish and exaggerated Warcraft look to again go for very grounded, realistic designs. And no, Warcraft does not dwarf the Dark Souls trilogy by any stretch of the imagination since it's up to about 35 million copies sold at this point. If we take the entire the "Soulsborne" series (as they all share aesthetic sensibilities and tone) then you could easily be looking at 50 million copies sold. Oh yeah and the remake of Demon's Souls that came out for the PS5 recently as a launch title.

If kids are growing up with any "fantasy" visual style nowadays then it'll either be anime-inspired, or Minecraft or Fortnite related.

 Bosskelot wrote:
It also completely ignores that the single biggest cultural juggernaut of the past decade was Game of Thrones, a very distinctly low/gritty fantasy that appealed because a lot of it felt grounded and realistic.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Isn't the Witcher quite popular as well? Lost of magic there Personally dislikd the TV show but the games are apparently good.

If the kids are Animae focussed - well thats normally massively over the top - and thats just the weapons!!

The apparent Empire civil war (and the fact that rather than just having "Bretonnia" as a faction they saw fit to emphasize the various dukedoms) would seem to point towards the idea that GW wanted to capitalize on the concept of medieval political intrigue ala GoT.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
It also completely ignores that the single biggest cultural juggernaut of the past decade was Game of Thrones, a very distinctly low/gritty fantasy that appealed because a lot of it felt grounded and realistic.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Isn't the Witcher quite popular as well? Lost of magic there Personally dislikd the TV show but the games are apparently good.

If the kids are Animae focussed - well thats normally massively over the top - and thats just the weapons!!

In a setting that is still primarily all gritty low fantasy. The difference is that a lot of those high fantasy aspects are splashes, small bits of color that have meaningful impact. People like the dragons, but they also like many of the other characters of the show beyond that of two main characters. In fact it is arguable that something like GoT or Witch are indeed very similar to WHF. Primarily low fantasy brutal world that when they get high fantasy, they can get pretty high.

As well what anime are we talking about, the grounded early portions of Berserk, //hacks and SAOs more mmo high, Goblin Slayers brutal DnD homage? You are over generalizing like an old man trying to figure out what is hip with the kids and missing the point.

I don't think I would read too much into the Dukedoms being named. It could also be just simple worldbuilding, as not everyone may know the details of Bretonnia and its Dukedoms...especially as some like Parravon were famous for specific things. In Parravon's case, basically all the Pegasus Knights hailed from the region around there since the Pegasi nested in the Gray Mountains nearby.

It could also be setting up the Mousillion kerfluffle or the war against Orcs or any number of things.

 BlackoCatto wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
It also completely ignores that the single biggest cultural juggernaut of the past decade was Game of Thrones, a very distinctly low/gritty fantasy that appealed because a lot of it felt grounded and realistic.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Isn't the Witcher quite popular as well? Lost of magic there Personally dislikd the TV show but the games are apparently good.

If the kids are Animae focussed - well thats normally massively over the top - and thats just the weapons!!

In a setting that is still primarily all gritty low fantasy. The difference is that a lot of those high fantasy aspects are splashes, small bits of color that have meaningful impact. People like the dragons, but they also like many of the other characters of the show beyond that of two main characters. In fact it is arguable that something like GoT or Witch are indeed very similar to WHF. Primarily low fantasy brutal world that when they get high fantasy, they can get pretty high.

As well what anime are we talking about, the grounded early portions of Berserk, //hacks and SAOs more mmo high, Goblin Slayers brutal DnD homage? You are over generalizing like an old man trying to figure out what is hip with the kids and missing the point.

Sad thing is I am old :( so maybe


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:
I don't think I would read too much into the Dukedoms being named. It could also be just simple worldbuilding, as not everyone may know the details of Bretonnia and its Dukedoms...especially as some like Parravon were famous for specific things. In Parravon's case, basically all the Pegasus Knights hailed from the region around there since the Pegasi nested in the Gray Mountains nearby.

It could also be setting up the Mousillion kerfluffle or the war against Orcs or any number of things.

Genevieve is also from Paravon and her novels are all still out (I think) - I can't recall if Bretonnia try and take advantage of the civil war - they sometimes do.

So much they can do - either large or small scale.

I'm sorry to call you old.


As well again, people like the dragons in GoT, but I don't think people want more dragons. Hell what makes them important isnt that they are dragons, it is that they are the last known dragons if I recall and more importantly an exiled royal's dragons. They are a splash, not the whole lake. You can say the same for the undead horde of the north. There in the background and affecting everything, but are not constantly present the ongoing of daily life. They re getting closer and closer until the threat of them does become the present in your face issue.

Part of this is a protagonist thing as well. Geralt is a Witcher, a beaing created of the witches, magical and alchemical beings that then deal with the worlds magical monsters and beings. It creates a bias as how we see the their world as we see it through them.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I don't think I would read too much into the Dukedoms being named. It could also be just simple worldbuilding, as not everyone may know the details of Bretonnia and its Dukedoms...especially as some like Parravon were famous for specific things. In Parravon's case, basically all the Pegasus Knights hailed from the region around there since the Pegasi nested in the Gray Mountains nearby.

It could also be setting up the Mousillion kerfluffle or the war against Orcs or any number of things.

Considering all the dukedoms heraldry are being presented alongside the "faction symbols" for four warring Empire states, Wood Elves, and High Elves, it would seem that they are intended to represent factions just as much as anything else - otherwise it would be poor data presentation and visualization to portray them in the same/similar manner as non-equivalent data.

 BlackoCatto wrote:

GrosseSax wrote:
As someone (along with my normal group) who had been introduced to WHFB through Total War and instantly fell in love with the setting, we were very disappointed to find that the entire TT setting was nuked a few years prior to us discovering it. We looked into Age of Sigmar and were thoroughly unimpressed so we decided to go with 8th. After months of collecting dozens of boxes of older minis still available on GW's storefront (greatswords, dreadspears, skelies, kemmler/krell etc) and those now discontinued elsewhere (the guy putting together a Stirlander army almost had a stroke when he saw the prices of empire archers on ebay), we thought we were in a pretty good place after hearing about the "Old World".

Needless to say, we hope there are no major changes to scale. If so, we'll just go back to our original plan. No harm, no foul.

Felt the same same when I saw the prices on Ebay for Bretonnian Men at Arms. Not to mention anything else that isn't 5e Archers and Knights of the Realm.

Stirlander hell - https://www.ebay.com/itm/224302513056?ul_noapp=true

chaos0xomega wrote:
Considering all the dukedoms heraldry are being presented alongside the "faction symbols" for four warring Empire states, Wood Elves, and High Elves, it would seem that they are intended to represent factions just as much as anything else - otherwise it would be poor data presentation and visualization to portray them in the same/similar manner as non-equivalent data.

Honest question, assuming there is a difference (Though as its a UK company, I would assume there is, since there is a difference) is it the heraldry of the dukedoms, or of the dukes themselves?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
It also completely ignores that the single biggest cultural juggernaut of the past decade was Game of Thrones, a very distinctly low/gritty fantasy that appealed because a lot of it felt grounded and realistic.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Isn't the Witcher quite popular as well? Lost of magic there Personally dislikd the TV show but the games are apparently good.

If the kids are Animae focussed - well thats normally massively over the top - and thats just the weapons!!

People really need to get over the fact that the colloquial meaning of "low fantasy" changed to pretty much mean "gritty dark fantasy in a world somewhat like our own history with some magic but it has a personal/existential cost or is very rare" about twenty years ago. Just as when you say "high fantasy", a lot(most, tbh) people don't hear "any setting with magic in it, even, strictly speaking, any fantasy not explicitly set on our own earth", they hear "World of Warcraft aesthetics and magitech toasters and modern D&D".

 Overread wrote:
Furthermore with 3D designs and no rank and file GW can do things they couldn't do in the past. The 3D element isn't just changing the nature of poses, but also the nature of cuts on the models. Look at the fiend sprue for Slaanesh, almost every single join line is hidden on the model and the pose is far more dynamic than the old style model. These are things 3D design and top end staff who know how to make good cuts with 3D software and moulds can achieve. GW is pushing the envelope in ways other firms are not and cannot easily do so.

If I were to track the history of GW models in the time I've been collecting, it would be something like this...

- high quality metal models with crappy monopose plastics

- multipose plastics that for the most part were pretty crappy, an improvement over the monopose but worse than the metals (but cheaper and easier to work with)

- gradually improving plastics to reach the level of quality of the metals.

- plastics surpassed the quality of the metals, but are now more expensive than the metals ever were and when every model has a dynamic pose the "special" models no longer stand out

I don't know if other companies are making plastic soldiers to the level of quality of GW's models as far as hidden mould lines and whatnot, but in the realm of plastic models in general, some of Tamiya's stuff over recent years has been really incredible. I think it's a mix of the increasing accuracy of plastics combined with the ingenuity of the designers. Many of Tamiya's recent generation of aircraft models have seam lines that are either tiny, or line up on an actual crevice in a way that makes it look like it's supposed to be that way, and the models go together really intelligently so the modeller doesn't have to worry about things like wing dihedral or the landing gear lining up properly, combine that with removable panels with magnets, plastic bushings for moving parts and the modern kits are really nice.

 Bosskelot wrote:
And no, Warcraft does not dwarf the Dark Souls trilogy by any stretch of the imagination

I don't care about the overarching argument in this thread within any capacity but you are absolutely out of your mind if you think this is a true statement. 35 million copies sold is pocket change compared to what WoW has raked in over its lifetime.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
And no, Warcraft does not dwarf the Dark Souls trilogy by any stretch of the imagination

I don't care about the overarching argument in this thread within any capacity but you are absolutely out of your mind if you think this is a true statement. 35 million copies sold is pocket change compared to what WoW has raked in over its lifetime.

Because it's an MMO so it has a constant revenue stream. Expansions too.

Actual copies sold is a very different matter.

Of course it's going to be bigger still, but people overestimate WoW's actual impact compared to a game like, say, Dark Souls. Especially when it comes to visual aesthetic and tone which is what I was referring to.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Low or gritty fantasy doesn't mean a lack of fantastical elements. By your definition Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar are practically identical, however I'm fairly certain this thread wouldn't even be happening if that was actually the case.

Only found this "The game had a total of over a hundred million registered accounts by 2014." "73,8 million sales as of 2012". With over 12 million active subscriptions at its peak as well I would say it dwarfs dark souls. Sure there are some that have made multiple accounts but I dont think they are more than the amount of people who have bought all 3 of the dark souls games + remaster. WoW total sales with expansions should be in the hundreds of millions and not just low tens like Dark Souls.

Probably something like 15 million who played dark souls and 10x as many who have played WoW + Warcraft

Right, but even if the argument that dark souls somehow sold better that Warcraft which it absolutely hasn't at all, the cultural impact of Warcraft stomps dark souls into the mud too.

And considering how much Warcraft was influenced by Warhammer, of course there is a market for WHFB.

I feel like the argument in this thread is just going round in circles.

I think estimates are about 12 million accounts at its peak, and over 100 million created accounts over its life. Though I imagine a decent chunk of that 100 million is duplicate accounts (not even necessarily simultaneous, but maybe someone created a new account when they came back to it, or maybe there was a deal of some description that got people to create a brand new rather than continue an old one).

By comparison, a game like The Witcher 3 has sold over 40 million copies.

It's hard to estimate the true penetration in society of these games though. As nerdy as I am, I've never played WoW (my MMO experience was the old WAR and LOTRO), and as nerdy as my mate is he's never played The Witcher 3. I've never tried Dark Souls because none of the reviews I've encountered makes me want to play it.

I think we have a tendency to exaggerate the reach of the games we see as common, either due to local ubiquity or our own interest.

There's definitely been an interest in both dark and gritty settings (Dark Souls, The Witcher, Game of Thrones, WHFB) and also the more comical settings like WoW.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Considering all the dukedoms heraldry are being presented alongside the "faction symbols" for four warring Empire states, Wood Elves, and High Elves, it would seem that they are intended to represent factions just as much as anything else - otherwise it would be poor data presentation and visualization to portray them in the same/similar manner as non-equivalent data.

Honest question, assuming there is a difference (Though as its a UK company, I would assume there is, since there is a difference) is it the heraldry of the dukedoms, or of the dukes themselves?

Not sure, I think its the Duke themselves.

I think any further discussion of Warcraft vs Dark Souls can be taken elsewhere

 Bosskelot wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
And no, Warcraft does not dwarf the Dark Souls trilogy by any stretch of the imagination

I don't care about the overarching argument in this thread within any capacity but you are absolutely out of your mind if you think this is a true statement. 35 million copies sold is pocket change compared to what WoW has raked in over its lifetime.

Because it's an MMO so it has a constant revenue stream. Expansions too.

Actual copies sold is a very different matter.

Of course it's going to be bigger still, but people overestimate WoW's actual impact compared to a game like, say, Dark Souls. Especially when it comes to visual aesthetic and tone which is what I was referring to.

Low fantasy.....hmmm

And yet many peoples favourite was Dany and her Dragons.....and/or the unkillable Jon and his Dire Wolf, giant magic wall.....it did have quasi medievil elements but also High Fantasy - prophercies, long journeys across strange lands, mythical beasts and even a dark lord (well Ice Lord) advancing from the North with an vast army of Undead.

Low or gritty fantasy doesn't mean a lack of fantastical elements. By your definition Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar are practically identical, however I'm fairly certain this thread wouldn't even be happening if that was actually the case.

You can, and they have, told the same style of stories in both worlds - so a few sewer jacks facing skaven or other horrors in the sewers beneath a unknowing and uncaring city or grand outrageous swashbucking adventures on flying ships - somethimes they even combine in Gotrek novels in both worlds.

By exploring or taking an specific element of these fantasy world you can craft a narrrative or experience to suit - be that the struggle of a singel Witch Hunter or lone survivor of a Orc raid with no magic etc or the total opposite with Archmages battling Greater Daemons. ALL of these can have consequences of action or inaction, use of magic or lack of same.