|
Post by avatarofbugman on Aug 10, 2016 23:10:31 GMT
I am more and more annoyed by what I see around the Web, especially with GenCon just finishing.
There is already Kings of War that is filling in for many, and now Fantasy Flight Games is coming out with their own Fantasy Mass Miniatures battle game, Runewars. I'm not going to go into how either of these games work, as that is not my point, but there is obviously a market for this style of game, and it seems to me that GW had its head up is ass when it changed the type of game it was putting out.
Forget the lore of the Warhammer World for a moment, although that is one of my favorite parts of the game. That can be bridged between AoS and the game we love with good writing. They changed the toe of game entirely, yet there are scores of people that want a mass combat game.
I realize I should just put this behind me and play what I love with those of like mind, but I can't help but want to see what could have been. AoS had the potential for some great stories and lore, but in the end it is not the game I desire.
Thanks for reading, and let's go roll some bones.
|
|
|
Post by vulcan on Aug 10, 2016 23:47:16 GMT
You're not saying anything the rest of us haven't already been thinking. GW screwed the pooch but good with ET and AoS.
|
|
|
Post by avatarofbugman on Aug 11, 2016 1:11:17 GMT
You're not saying anything the rest of us haven't already been thinking. GW screwed the pooch but good with ET and AoS. True, but it is more evident now with companies actually creating product to fill that void. ET was awesome. I have no problems with that, and AoS storywise could easily have stepped off from there. Most of the factions actually still exist on AoS. The problem was more in the game design than anything else, and in reality it is not a bad game as a stand alone. The mechanics are actually very nice. It could even have been adapted to mass combat (because they had already done that). It will be interesting to see what happens next.
|
|
|
Post by Baronthehumbled on Aug 11, 2016 3:43:05 GMT
Ah, what could've been... happy communties, Bretonnian updates and people to argue with about the army prices and lore discrepancies with every new armybook. Questions like that will drive you mad though so be careful.
|
|
|
Post by Horace on Aug 11, 2016 8:16:01 GMT
I would really have liked to have seen a little movement in the timeline. I think with each edition they could have progressed things a very small amount. It would have been cool if Chaos could come and take a few provinces one edition, the Dwarfs could retake a few holds, Chaos could be driven back etc etc.
Minor things really which do not fundamentally alter the setting. Sort of like a TV programme where everything is kind of the same at the start of the next episode. What it would provide however is some interesting stories for each army book, the chance to introduce new characters and some really cool possibilities for campaigns.
Blowing up the world and replacing the game with a dumbed down version really was not the answer
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Aug 11, 2016 12:34:55 GMT
I would really have liked to have seen a little movement in the timeline. I think with each edition they could have progressed things a very small amount. It would have been cool if Chaos could come and take a few provinces one edition, the Dwarfs could retake a few holds, Chaos could be driven back etc etc. Minor things really which do not fundamentally alter the setting. Sort of like a TV programme where everything is kind of the same at the start of the next episode. What it would provide however is some interesting stories for each army book, the chance to introduce new characters and some really cool possibilities for campaigns. Blowing up the world and replacing the game with a dumbed down version really was not the answer The sad thing was that in 8th edition they were actually doing that (moving story forwards a bit). Karak Eight Peaks is one of my favourite parts of the Warhammer world. In 8th Edition (Thorgrim novella) before the End Times started they made a HUGE (to me) development where Gorfang Rotgut was officially slain and Skarsnik became the sole power in that area for the greenskins.... then End Times came and that became a miniscule footnote. I would have loved to see more 'little' things like that where the balance of power shifts a bit but nothing too world altering.
|
|
|
Post by roughtimes on Aug 12, 2016 19:12:55 GMT
GW has pretty much sucked over the last decade. This was a company that practically bragged about not using market research. Lol.
They treated customers like garbage. How about releasing five expensive end times books right before destroying the game.
This is pure speculation, but i would guess that there's some truth to the rumors that WFB sales were poor or at least slowing down. GW made the decision to kill the game and try to reinvigorated the customer base, rather than let it slowly wither away.
I wonder where GW placed the blame, if WFB sales really were not strong enough. Did they think the customers were bored with the setting and rules that had remained fairly static over the years? For me, the majority of the blame rests with their pricing strategy. I cannot fathom how any sane person could start this game from scratch in the last eight years.
Maybe it could have worked but modern GW hasn't been very strong in the game design department. AOS ended up downgrading the quality of rules and eliminating a setting that fans cared about. Combine that with a slightly (totally) polarizing direction of current model design and you have a recipe for disaster.
|
|
|
Post by Baronthehumbled on Aug 13, 2016 18:49:39 GMT
Wfb's bad sales aren't a rumor but a fact. They were only contributing 15% of GW's profit and were falling. There was no way GW could afford to keep supporting something like that without serious changes to it.
Unfortunately those changes for the better, such as Start collecting kits and community feedback, also meant the old world's destruction. (Though even if they kept the old world they would've had of changed the army names. Everyone's going IP crazy these days with examples ranging from Nintendo copyrighting "It's on like Donkey Kong" to several birthday party companies filing lawsuits over the "Happy birthday" song....)
|
|
|
Post by roughtimes on Aug 13, 2016 19:38:49 GMT
That's fine but why are we so sure that the game was the cause?
Maybe he priced themselves out of the mass battle fantasy market. Maybe the new design aesthetic wasn't working.
|
|
|
Post by Baronthehumbled on Aug 13, 2016 21:17:26 GMT
It was a mixture of the high prices, large armies and very rare advertisements. It made it a rather niche game that was being dominated by competitive-minded players that made buying for fun and fluff hard to do.
So new blood for the game dwindled to a trickle.
Of course, the mass battle market isn't really booming despite new companies filling the gap. They're still heavily kickstarter reliant and even 9th age model makers agree to GW's decision since their kickstarters for discontinued armies, like Tomb kings and Bretonnia, only see very partial support from the fanbases.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Sept 7, 2016 20:12:42 GMT
Personally, I believe that the fan base is there and would support a game that gave the same level of commitment back. That's where I believe the true problem to exist. Any large scale game like this requires devotion from both the customer and the company. If GW had put as much time and development into producing a quality rule set, new minis, advertising and better price points, as they did with 40K (except for the prices), then they would have received the same level of support as 40K did. That was strictly a marketing choice because they could garner more first-time buyers for a game like 40K. New buyers = more new kits being sold. Thus, we have AoS. GW tried remaking WFB into a fantasy version of 40K game style. Seemingly though, it appears that they didn't really consider that the style of fighting of medieval vs modern warfare are not one in the same.
There will ALWAYS be someone to fill the proverbial void. It will take them time and much start-up money, but eventually someone will rise to the top just as GW did.
For me though, GW has shown it's colors and I cannot continue to financially support a company that demonstrates it's total lack of concern for it's customer base. Producing 5, extremely expensive books detailing how they are destroying the Warhammer World and then instituting pointless changes to existing armies (like switching to round bases), indicates only an intense greed that defies logic. I only see AoS as a method to transition those willing to suffer through all the drastic changes from one game style to another. They have essentially used the same names (only tweaked for IP purposes) and are currently allowing models from 8th edition to be used with AoS - though I fully expect that to change as well just as soon as their new mold production has a chance to catch up with the new game. It also will give them the time to analyze how profitable AoS is and whether or not they will continue to support it as well. I will not turn over my hard-earned money at the prices GW wants, for a game that they can so easily abandon.
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on Sept 7, 2016 20:21:24 GMT
I think prices are easy to talk about but most high quality miniature companies are charging the same or more per miniature (particularly when you take into account GW's excellent and extensive plastic range) Warmachine is more per mini Kings of War is less but the quality is significantly worse. Game system is also much less in depth.
For that matter 40K is more per mini (some of the standard minis folks are fielding are $180) but is still the king of the miniature market. 40K is also run by the same company with theoretically the same flaws in leadership but still retains market share.
Part of it is the ease of other manufacturers to steal GW's IP and the relatively static nature of the line. Devoted 40K fans keep buying new toys particularly as new lines (fliers!, Gargants/Titans!, Super heavy tanks!) get introduced. Devoted or even new WFB fans might buy nothing from GW and still have playable armies either because chaos for example has essentially the same minis in the line it did 20 years ago (my warriors are essentially the same toys I've owned for decades) or because other manufacturers were stealing GW sales with look a like products designed to be played in WFB.
Lack of sales/growth of the community in WFB has been an ongoing and well documented issue for GW - heck just look at the GT scene new WFB players were much rare during 8th then they were in seventh.
|
|
|
Post by wilsonthenarc on Sept 7, 2016 20:51:19 GMT
I dunno. Free Market, brahs. I mean, economics - plain & simple.
I am a fan of GW. Their sculpts are good. But it boils down to what do I get for my money. I don't think I have gotten true value for my consumer dollar from GW since about 2002.
I did and still do buy their stuff, but I hate myself for it. It's sub-optimal value. I spent $50 with GW instead of $20 with Competitor X because I wanted to support a company that made such a good game. I get how the economic engine works. They're a company, a company exists to make money. Ergo, I need to buy stuff from that company so they can continue to exist.
The math is this: weigh my non-Value devotion to the company versus a Value based decision of what I could get from Competitor X
If I get get (apples to apples) Model ABC from GW for $50 and the non-Union equivalent of Model ABC from Old Glory for $45, I would choose GW. But GW didn't even make it close for me.
I don't need to drive a Cadillac, I just wanted a used Honda. They're nuts. Ask a non-Warhammer person you know... paying the $80 to $120 for the kits they sell actually seems INSANE to someone outside of that bubble.
|
|
|
Post by roughtimes on Sept 7, 2016 21:23:38 GMT
Paying $80-120 seems insane to me and I've been in the bubble for 20 plus years
|
|
|
Post by wilsonthenarc on Sept 7, 2016 21:54:50 GMT
Is this a great mini? www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Sylvaneth-Alarielle-the-EverqueenYes She's beautiful, obv. It is a $130 value? To me, NO. Perspective might be: Would I rather have that 1 mini, or plan FNM (Magic) 8 times? Would I rather buy enough raw material to make, say, 20 pieces of terrain? Would I rather order like 10 blister packs of Bones AND enough paints to last me 6 months? Would I rather have that 1 plastic mini- or buy 4 army packs of 30 metal dudes from Old Glory? I dunno. I like armies. I like minis that can tip over on accident and survive to tell the tale. While beautiful, the Everqueen belongs behind the glass case of an eccentric millionaire.
|
|