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.

Always wondered why they dident release a true to the TT version of warhammer or 40k. One that you could make your army, then challenge others with pre generated terrain and whatnot. Do they think it would pull alot of the fans of the game away from the hobby and lose them a ton of money? I think they would be highly successful, and they could even make it so you only get one faction per version, so if you wanted multiple armies you would have to buy more. OR they could make it a game with a monthly fee, I really think it would be huge, someone over there HAD to have thought of these ideas, just wondering why they havent done this.

It would more than likely be a turn based "RTS" type. Although not really "real time" more like TBS (turn based strategy). I have thought about somthing like this in the past. You would not really even need to play other people. They could have you play the computer. It could however have a strange impact on thier mini's ssales. This way you would no longer have to argue about things like LOS and bicker with people. The market analysis would be interesting to look at.

No way. Never. Nope.

It would be like robbing Peter to play Paul.( not Punny!! )

Dawn of War was as close as we are going to get I think. Why would you pixillate something, when you can sell it on it's own for $10?

BTW, I played 40k in the 80's, discovered RTS's-and thought 'Why paint all those mini's when the Computer does it for me?'

Back into 40k BECAUSE I have to paint my mini's. I would rather have 100's of Marines, than a .sav file.

Just my opinion lads.

Its an interesting thought, but I agree it would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. I do belive it would rob sales from the "established" medium, and with issues like download theft, and the revenues they would have to pay (possibly) to have the game availible on certain formats, it would probably costs far too much.

I mean, look at it this way, WH40K could branch out into the following areas and "ideally" it would consititute a win for GW:

Action figures
Computer games
Airsoft weapons and armour (live roleplay)
Films
Cartoons
R/C vehicles

To name a few.....now, how many of the above have been persued in any serious way?

The already did this with the Warhammer games.

Shadow of the Horned Rat, and Dark Omen.


As for "Not going to happen"...



Never say never. They will do something with it, maybe not as close to open season, but I have found a mod of 40k that is being worked at this time along the lines of Battlefield 2, and have seen the MMO for Warhammer. There is a PSP squad based game that is coming out, if its not in your local store already, and there is talk of a 40K MMO.

As for the interactive army builder, and the 40k RST games, we have at this time a pretty close idea that the tech is there, and that GW could theoreticly put out a few different disc versionsa of thier armies and playewrs could play 40k over the internet, with a mod, or a system worked out. As with the popularity of the 40k rst, Dawn of War, that has two other additions, plus the third that will be out soon, we have the software.

At this time, with GW flailing around to get out of thier run of bad luck and mismanagement, THQ has a close second to what you are looking for. When GW figures out how much they could make with the game, and how many more players they could convert to the fold, they would make a computer game in a heartbeat.

The future is computer games, even if they don't want to admit it.

I don't think we'll ever see it.

GW is, foremost, a miniatures company. They happen to make some games that exist primarily to sell more miniatures. Their investment in miniature development is so much greater than their investment in rules development. And that shows in both the quality of the miniatures, and the quality of the rules.

You're not going to sell a PC game for much more than $50. That's pretty much an established market price. And, with a PC game, you would only have to buy it once. Whereas you keep buying miniatures over and over.

In order to sell a PC game, they're going to need to invest significantly more into rules development. A computer needs to know, definitively, the answer to "how does Lash work", "can a shoota boy squad have a PK nob", and "how does a size 3 Monstrous Creature actually block line-of-sight". All that additional investment in rules development is doing is taking away from their miniature sales.

Well, what about a business model like MTGO? For reference, MTGO is Magic:The Gathering's online offering. Their rules are airtight, so it wasn't too much of a stretch for them to model the game on a computer. But, they had the same business model problem that a miniature company would have - they made money by selling pieces (cards) for a game, not the game itself. So, their online business model was to sell digital objects. Why buy a paper card when you can buy a digital one for the same price. Makes you wonder why anyone would go for it - until you realize that people sell virtual stuff on eBay for all sorts of games. And, in order to reassure the doubtful, they backed their digital objects with real world ones - this was genius. If you collected a full set of digital cards, you could exchange them, with the click of a button, for a physical set of the same cards. This legitimized the offering enough that the virtual cards took on a value of their own really fast, and the economy worked. (Kind of like money... it works because enough people believe it works, and once upon a time, you could exchange your paper dollar for gold). I don't know how many people, if any, ever took advantage of the redeem feature, but I know that when I stopped playing it, prices for digital singles were roughly comparable to prices for real-world singles.

So, is that model possible for warhammer? Give the actual game engine away, and sell digital pieces to use in it? And, back those pieces with the promise of being able to redeem them for physical minis? I don't think so. It works for collectible cards, because the market sets itself, it isn't set by an outside agency. Wizards sells you a pack of cards. The fact that you can open a single that will sell for more than you paid for the pack is a matter of supply-and-demand outside the company's control. And, packs are relatively inexpensive. The idea that someone would pay $50 for a virtual monolith to use in the online game, even if it is exchangable for a real monolith, is a bit laughable.

Without that, though, they're basically giving up a huge portion of their miniatures market. Anyone who just wants to play, and doesn't really enjoy the hobby aspects, is gone, and I don't think you'll get enough computer gamers to write off all those mini sales.

I don't think this would work either for reasons already mentioned. But I think as far as video games go, dawn of war is pretty much where it's at. I'd love to see a fantasy version of that too one day. I also loved Space Hulk for my 3DO too.

I'd also love to see an airsoft battle cannon too.

Orock wrote:Always wondered why they dident release a true to the TT version of warhammer or 40k.

Probably because the development cost would be ridiculous.

That is why GW licensed 40k for DOW.

But check out Epic Final Liberation. That game is really good approximation of the tabletop for when it came out.

And Space Hulk was a good match, too.

Did you see the 40K module for Vassal, wich is basically the Tabletop on the PC (but only playable against humans).
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/205670.page


But in fact I would like to see a realistic strategy or tactic game for Warhammer 40k. Dawn of War is a nice Arcade game, but it has nothing to do with Reality or the 40K fluff.
So a Tactic game like the Close Combat Series, Blitzkrieg I or Sudden Strike with 40k, or strategy like Hearts of Iron, Master of Orion or Europa Unversalis for 40k would be what I would like best.
I would even like Final Liberation II or Chaos Gate II, wich were great games.

I dont think anyone would stop building, painting and converting but many people would buy the games, some of them starting to buy miniatures perhaps.

I suspect a subscription system would work decently for a 40k turn based internet game. It would produce a nice consistent flow of cash, which would be pretty much required if you were going to offer an alternative to buying miniatures.
Now, I don't think that it would be a one way street. I got into 40k by virtue of DOW, and drug my friend into it by the same path. But then I had played table top before; I am not certain I would have jumped into an expensive hobby if I hadn't been familier with it. There is a definite lure of having your own figures in real life and not in a .sav file as has been stated, so I really think GW wouldn't lose table top players completely, but the two would bleed off each other, necessitating a steady stream of income from the digital game.

Another plus might be that GW could put out "test" armies in the turn based game to see how popular they are before they make models etc. You could test rules and balance en masse in such a fashion, releasing the new codexes in the online game before printing. Letting a few thousand people play test a new army build pretty quickly finds problems and exploits compared to how they do it now.

First of all, I HATE RTS games.
I absolutely hate them.

I am far too casual a gamer, on those few occasions that I DO game on a computer, to keep up the pace required.

I get annoyed and bored easily.

Now, a TURN BASED strategy game would be perfect. I'd LOVE a turn based strategy game for 40K. I could play 40K whenever I wanted, without the time of setting up a table & minis, only to realize that I don't have anyone to play against.
I think it would be a GREAT learning tool, for those of us who are strategy-impaired. ::sheepishly raises hand::

I think, like others, that it would have a positive effect on GW's bottom line by drawing people into the Table Top game.

Worried about losing fan base to those who decide to only play online? No problem. It's single player, now. Want multi player? No problem... "Just pay our monthly subscription fee and you can connect through our server..."

ALL legal armies should be available with the game, or as FREE downloads. Additionally, new codexes would have free downloads for the game... for a year after initial purchase. After that... small subscription fee.

If GW kept their hands in it (as we all know they would), then it could help solve REAL LIFE game problems, too.
If the game will let you shoot at a MC hiding behind a Rhino in the video game, then it should be allowed on the table.
Does the video game allow Bungee-hawks? the table-top would mimic that.


Heck. That would solve a LOT of rules problems.


I'm in. I'd pay $50 for this to be available ON MY COMPUTER (not a video game console),


Eric

Redbeard wrote:I don't think we'll ever see it.

GW is, foremost, a miniatures company. They happen to make some games that exist primarily to sell more miniatures. Their investment in miniature development is so much greater than their investment in rules development. And that shows in both the quality of the miniatures, and the quality of the rules.

You're not going to sell a PC game for much more than $50. That's pretty much an established market price. And, with a PC game, you would only have to buy it once. Whereas you keep buying miniatures over and over.

In order to sell a PC game, they're going to need to invest significantly more into rules development. A computer needs to know, definitively, the answer to "how does Lash work", "can a shoota boy squad have a PK nob", and "how does a size 3 Monstrous Creature actually block line-of-sight". All that additional investment in rules development is doing is taking away from their miniature sales.

Well, what about a business model like MTGO? For reference, MTGO is Magic:The Gathering's online offering. Their rules are airtight, so it wasn't too much of a stretch for them to model the game on a computer. But, they had the same business model problem that a miniature company would have - they made money by selling pieces (cards) for a game, not the game itself. So, their online business model was to sell digital objects. Why buy a paper card when you can buy a digital one for the same price. Makes you wonder why anyone would go for it - until you realize that people sell virtual stuff on eBay for all sorts of games. And, in order to reassure the doubtful, they backed their digital objects with real world ones - this was genius. If you collected a full set of digital cards, you could exchange them, with the click of a button, for a physical set of the same cards. This legitimized the offering enough that the virtual cards took on a value of their own really fast, and the economy worked. (Kind of like money... it works because enough people believe it works, and once upon a time, you could exchange your paper dollar for gold). I don't know how many people, if any, ever took advantage of the redeem feature, but I know that when I stopped playing it, prices for digital singles were roughly comparable to prices for real-world singles.

So, is that model possible for warhammer? Give the actual game engine away, and sell digital pieces to use in it? And, back those pieces with the promise of being able to redeem them for physical minis? I don't think so. It works for collectible cards, because the market sets itself, it isn't set by an outside agency. Wizards sells you a pack of cards. The fact that you can open a single that will sell for more than you paid for the pack is a matter of supply-and-demand outside the company's control. And, packs are relatively inexpensive. The idea that someone would pay $50 for a virtual monolith to use in the online game, even if it is exchangable for a real monolith, is a bit laughable.

Without that, though, they're basically giving up a huge portion of their miniatures market. Anyone who just wants to play, and doesn't really enjoy the hobby aspects, is gone, and I don't think you'll get enough computer gamers to write off all those mini sales.

A monthly subscription fee would take care of that nicely, and you cant look at online game juggernaughts like world of warcraft and call a good idea "risky business" anymore. The IP has been around for 25 years, it would make them obscene amounts of money JUST from tne new online players, as well as the fans.

Orock wrote:Always wondered why they dident release a true to the TT version of warhammer or 40k.

in the early 90's when starcraft was developed , Blizzard was working with GW but they never finalized anything. GW backed out and blizzard kept going just reworking the names and such. now Blizzard has become one of the premier software game companies, while GW is withering away.

GW has never and will never use the internets effectively. They have a product and a plan and are going to ride it out until the wheels fall off. If anything, they should have created an online version on their website to get people interested in the games they make and drive traffic to them.

Euro style boardgames and most Wargames have online versions, but then again these genres are in their golden age, while GW has remain stagnet for the last 10 years.

Orock wrote:A monthly subscription fee would take care of that nicely, and you cant look at online game juggernaughts like world of warcraft and call a good idea "risky business" anymore. The IP has been around for 25 years, it would make them obscene amounts of money JUST from tne new online players, as well as the fans.

A monthly subscription plan for multiplayer for an RTS would shoot the project right in the frakking head before it got out of the gate. There are enough alternatives out there that people will (reasonably) ask why they should pay $15 a month to play Warhammer Online RTS rather than play Starcraft for free.

Salvation122 wrote:

Orock wrote:A monthly subscription fee would take care of that nicely, and you cant look at online game juggernaughts like world of warcraft and call a good idea "risky business" anymore. The IP has been around for 25 years, it would make them obscene amounts of money JUST from tne new online players, as well as the fans.

A monthly subscription plan for multiplayer for an RTS would shoot the project right in the frakking head before it got out of the gate. There are enough alternatives out there that people will (reasonably) ask why they should pay $15 a month to play Warhammer Online RTS rather than play Starcraft for free.

Not a RTS, a version of the table top game, turn based, so micro managers dont have an advantage over tacticians.

Making it a turn-based game that isn't Civilization would also make it impossible to get off the ground.

The last turn-based tactical game that did even remotely well was Fallout: Tactics, and "well" there is probably something of a stretch; it was still very much a niche game based on a setting with a cult following. That was back in, what, '98? Way the hell a long time ago, as PC games go, anyway.

I'd add Jagged Alliance 2 to Fallout Tactics; with the 'huge in Europe' caveat.

I'd like to see GW do more licensing of their IP; it's basically straight profit to license it to THQ for DoW, or similar situations where it doesn't impinge on their main line. So a Necromunda style computer game, or other such small squad based game, a giant fighting robot game based on Titans, etc.

Why not license it to a video game company for a game similar to Mass Effect? Play as either a Puritan or Radical Inquisitor, in the 40K milieu. Although depending on how Fire Warrior did (which I didn't play, as my PC at the time couldn't run it), some companies might be scared off.

Salvation122 wrote:Making it a turn-based game that isn't Civilization would also make it impossible to get off the ground.

The last turn-based tactical game that did even remotely well was Fallout: Tactics, and "well" there is probably something of a stretch; it was still very much a niche game based on a setting with a cult following. That was back in, what, '98? Way the hell a long time ago, as PC games go, anyway.

No offense but I think your WAY off. A turn based game would be true to the tabletop, as well as put the strategy into it, not just who can micro and build the fastest cheapest units to overrun the other guys base before he can get 2 builders out. And the reason turn based have flopped lately is the industry is putting no effort into them. Heroes of might and magic 5 was the last good one I played, and that is 6 years old. Writing off turn based games is like saying platform gaming is dead, sure its not hot NOW, but watch every couple of years a platformer comes out that blows people away, and makes a ton of money. Just takes the effort, the fan base is already built in.

If they were to put out such a game, why on earth would they want to base it on the godawful 40k ruleset? For starters, a computer is a whole hell of a lot better (and faster) at generating random numbers than a bunch of D6s. You would no longer have to worry about "slowing the game down" by making things too complicated - you could even have To Hit modifiers! The computer-based format would allow for things currently lacking in 40k - like more complex mechanics for morale and suppressive fire, not to mention simultaneous turns and fog of war. And this could all be implemented without having to worry about invalidating anybody's codex or army list.

Dark Scipio wrote:But in fact I would like to see a realistic strategy or tactic game for Warhammer 40k. Dawn of War is a nice Arcade game, but it has nothing to do with Reality or the 40K fluff.
So a Tactic game like the Close Combat Series, Blitzkrieg I or Sudden Strike with 40k, or strategy like Hearts of Iron, Master of Orion or Europa Unversalis for 40k would be what I would like best.
I would even like Final Liberation II or Chaos Gate II, wich were great games.

I dont think anyone would stop building, painting and converting but many people would buy the games, some of them starting to buy miniatures perhaps.

I must also agree that Dawn of War and really all the other real time strategy games lack appeal to me mostly because they lack strategy. The game comes down to who can micro manage their army the best, not who can actually plan the best strategy or even who builds the best army. A real tactical game is almost required to be turn based to ensure that it doesn't boil down to which player has the better twitch reflexes or the best mastery of the hot key system.

In my opinion, Master of Orion 2 was the best computer game ever made. It was a space empire building game where there were lots of choices to be made. At the beginning of the game, you had to use a point system to design your race. There were lots of advantages and disadvantages you could chose from and most of them were well balanced (cybernetic sucked but that's neither here not there). Then, as in many empire games, you did research to gain technology. However, unlike any other game before or since, each time you researched some technology, there were several other technologies on the same tech level that you would be passing up. So you had to choose carefully what you researched because you couldn't go back and get the things you passed up (although you could trade other races for them or steal them through military conquest or spying). That, in and of itself, made the game extremely dynamic. From there you could design your own ships with whatever weapons and equipment you had researched and sometimes using "old" technology was a good idea because you could fit more of it on your ships than newer more powerful stuff. Finally, combat was turn based and had a lot of choices to make. Do you bunch your ships up so they can focus their fire on targets while risking damage should one of them blow up and catch others in the blast? Do you move up and try to board enemy ships or do you run away while launching waves of missiles and fighters? All tactical choices to be made based on how you have set up your race, your technology, and your ships. There were also counters to everything too, so there wasn't just one uber strategy.

Final Liberation was a lot of fun, but the way the computer ramped up to counter whatever force you brought always kind of irked me. The general game play however was loads of fun and decent simulation of Epic for imperials and orcs. The game was set up to eventually include expansions for eldar, nids, and chaos but they were never created.

Chaos gate was another fun one. It was set up as tactical squad combat a la X-Com. The problems I had with that game were that there wasn't much customization that you could do with your units. You had a devastator squad, an assault squad or two, a terminator squad and some tac squads. You could move around what heavy weapons you had and you could give your librarian different psi powers, but that was about it. That and terminators were will neigh invincible. Still, the game was fun, but no substitute for a real game of 40k.

I don't think we will ever see a true computer simulation of table top 40k. Doing that would cut too far into GW's main business which is selling models. However, I think we can expect to see lots of games that use the GW worlds as back drops for other styles of game that don't really take the place of the table top game.

Shadow of the Horned Rat, and Dark Omen.

These were the playstation version of Fantasy.

There was actually 2 turnbased computer games made about warhammer 40k in 97 and 98. One was called Chaos Gate,and the other dealt with Eldar. I never got that one. I still have Chaos Gate but getting it to run on newer computers is a pain. Only had two sides. Space Marines and Chaos. You could design your own terrain and battle it out over LAN. It was actually what first drew and friend and I into 40k.