|
|
Post by livewaaaaagh on Jun 5, 2017 0:44:27 GMT
Hi all,
Just a quick thread to talk about something I just heard: So a group of the biggest youTubers that feature Total War: Warhammer met recently with Creative Assembly (producer) to talk about Total War: Warhammer 2, which is coming out later this year. Among many things about the game itself, there was one item that stuck me as important. One of the youTubers basically said (and I'm paraphrasing here): GW has given Creative Assembly complete freedom starting with Game 2 to create new units ( if need be), bring back old armies from old editions, and make changes as they need to. Of course, they'll still require approval from GW, but apparently it's pretty "relaxed". One of the 1st examples is there will be "feral" units of Stegadon, Bastilodon and Caronosaur for the Lizardmen army and a new Bastilodon with "Revivification" that'll heal nearby units.
So this thread really is about two things:
1 - What are your thoughts on GW "relaxing" their IP stronghold?
2 - What, if anything, does this mean for the future?
Allow me to give my initial thoughts:
What I'm thinking here is two-fold. On one hand, if CA makes big changes to units, adds units and develops armies for Kislev, Araby, etc, then we'll play (if you own the game) in a world with armies from all sorts of edition and that could prove fun. On the other, if GW is allowing changes, new units, etc, are they basically saying "Well, Fantasy is dead and done for us, so do whatever you want with it - within some sort of measure".
What's your take?
|
|
|
|
Post by Horace on Jun 5, 2017 7:47:21 GMT
I am not too fond of CA getting too much free reign, particularly with established armies. They should concentrate on putting all the existing units in rather than cheaping out and adding feral Stegadons etc (Because that's what it is - they are padding the roster because they don't want to/haven't yet animated the other units). Anything too ridiculous will no doubt be modded out by myself or others.
For armies like Kislev etc where there is very little in the way of a full-rosters-worth of army, I am all for them doing what they need to do to flesh them out. The more populated and diverse the world, the better.
I think GW has already made it fairly clear Fantasy is dead and done?
|
|
|
|
Post by Baronthehumbled on Jun 5, 2017 16:26:06 GMT
Eh, as long as CA doesn't get out of control about it that's fine they have more freedom for the game. Though a bit unfortunate for modders since that means a longer time of dlcs that'll keep CA busy before they allow apeople to mod anything they want.
About Wfb being dead, GW still sells the license and recognizes that part of the franchise as they have two new games on the way and have Cubicle 7 making a rpg for it.
I think old fantasy will continue to live on in all but model form as GW don't want to deal with the copyright issues and won't allow another company to do it and compete with their products. (Part of the reason why FFG left them to make Runewars)
|
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on Jun 5, 2017 17:00:20 GMT
Other video games with GW IP have had various ability to flex the IP to do what they like. Blood Bowl online through Cyanide for example created a Khorne and Brettonian team that were never GW approved. Various other games I've played (warhammer quest, space hulk) have added bits and pieces here and there that aren't in their rules. Or updated their older rules to reflect modern era IP or sensibilities.
GW retains the IP to the 8th ed IP. Total War is a good example of a way they can capitalize on this IP. If things sell well there may be interest in other adaptations.
I noticed they appear to be rereleasing old Black Library novels from 8th ed era as "chronicles" much like Star Wars has a "Legends" (or something like that) line of novels.
On FFG - I think the relationship was great when FFG stayed out of the miniature business and stuck with board games. When Xwing is one of the hottest selling games it starts to look less like a healthy partnership and a bit like your IP is funding your major competitor to help drive business away from your main product line. I've bought some FFG games just because of the GW IP (Chaos in the Old World and Blood Bowl Team Manager) I am not alone in that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2017 17:18:36 GMT
I need to get a computer that will play these games. That's my takeaway from all this  |
|
|
|
Post by livewaaaaagh on Jun 5, 2017 19:43:58 GMT
Other video games with GW IP have had various ability to flex the IP to do what they like. Blood Bowl online through Cyanide for example created a Khorne and Brettonian team that were never GW approved. Various other games I've played (warhammer quest, space hulk) have added bits and pieces here and there that aren't in their rules. Or updated their older rules to reflect modern era IP or sensibilities. GW retains the IP to the 8th ed IP. Total War is a good example of a way they can capitalize on this IP. If things sell well there may be interest in other adaptations. I noticed they appear to be rereleasing old Black Library novels from 8th ed era as "chronicles" much like Star Wars has a "Legends" (or something like that) line of novels. On FFG - I think the relationship was great when FFG stayed out of the miniature business and stuck with board games. When Xwing is one of the hottest selling games it starts to look less like a healthy partnership and a bit like your IP is funding your major competitor to help drive business away from your main product line. I've bought some FFG games just because of the GW IP (Chaos in the Old World and Blood Bowl Team Manager) I am not alone in that. I might re-read and support the Sundering if it means GW maybe sees "oh crap, maybe we should do a 9th edition" - even if similar to 40k's new rules, but with regiments! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2017 19:55:26 GMT
I'd be happy if they released another supplement similar to the skirmish one they just did that deals with regiments (which is how I see this going if I'm being totally honest).
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm NOT interested in a skirmish game, if I were I'd play Warmachine (and I do). I want a game that deals with regiments of troops (mainly infantry) fighting regiments of troops. I also want all this to happen in a fantasy setting.
*sigh* maybe historicals are the way to go...
|
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Jun 6, 2017 5:58:43 GMT
I'll admit to not having read it but gw releasing their new skirmish confused the hell out of me. How is it different to AoS?
I will say I love the TW games and had endlessly played the Rome Warhammer mod for that before the official game came out. I don't mind small tweaks (or big ones if it involves adding in unique armies say for Nippon etc) but would definitely prefer them to add in existing armies and flesh out missing units first (looking at you ghorgon).
|
|
|
|
Post by Horace on Jun 6, 2017 8:04:48 GMT
I need to get a computer that will play these games. That's my takeaway from all this Indeed you do  It is an excellent game, I have not played it in a while I think I am about due a Brets campaign |
|
|
|
Post by Baronthehumbled on Jun 6, 2017 8:24:32 GMT
Fully agreed there, brilliant game by CA.
AoS is what I like to call mass skirmish, even at low points around 500 or so you still need minimum units of troops.
The Skirmish allows a Mordheim-sized warband to be used.
|
|
|
|
Post by mahbruck on Jun 6, 2017 17:01:33 GMT
Don't know whether it is related or not, but now I'm desperately jealous of 40k fans. The whole Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar were the guinea pigs tested on by GW to make sure the transition of 40k into a more profitable, newbie-friendly edition (yet still appealing to the old guards) is an absolute success. But to look on the bright side, the relentless scaremongering on those space marine lads during the past two years had been hilarious though |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Jun 6, 2017 17:05:30 GMT
Other video games with GW IP have had various ability to flex the IP to do what they like. Blood Bowl online through Cyanide for example created a Khorne and Brettonian team that were never GW approved. Various other games I've played (warhammer quest, space hulk) have added bits and pieces here and there that aren't in their rules. Or updated their older rules to reflect modern era IP or sensibilities. GW retains the IP to the 8th ed IP. Total War is a good example of a way they can capitalize on this IP. If things sell well there may be interest in other adaptations. I noticed they appear to be rereleasing old Black Library novels from 8th ed era as "chronicles" much like Star Wars has a "Legends" (or something like that) line of novels. On FFG - I think the relationship was great when FFG stayed out of the miniature business and stuck with board games. When Xwing is one of the hottest selling games it starts to look less like a healthy partnership and a bit like your IP is funding your major competitor to help drive business away from your main product line. I've bought some FFG games just because of the GW IP (Chaos in the Old World and Blood Bowl Team Manager) I am not alone in that. Thanks for posting that link. Warhammer Fantasy returning in novel for is great. At the time I missed the Black Plague books (love cl werner). Hopefully I can get that in Anthology form soon. Maybe eventually BL will do another novel set in the Warhammer Fantasy world. On the topic of BL...I really enjoyed their book "Genestealer Cults" which does imo a good job of looking inside the alien mindset and how the cults attack a world. Recommended. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2017 19:49:34 GMT
Don't know whether it is related or not, but now I'm desperately jealous of 40k fans. The whole Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar were the guinea pigs tested on by GW to make sure the transition of 40k into a more profitable, newbie-friendly edition (yet still appealing to the old guards) is an absolutely success. But to look on the bright side, the relentless scaremongering on those marine lads during the past two years had been hilarious though I'm also jealous of those guys. Around here about 90% of the players play 40k, the facebook group for the local gamers is abuzz with 40k posts right now. If I wasn't so heavily invested in fantasy I'd consider giving it a try, I'm itching to try out the skitarii and adeptus mechanicus robots (and titans). I'm going to wait another year though to see how they handle future releases and if the game has any semblance of balance. |
|
|
|
Post by gjnoronh on Jun 6, 2017 19:49:51 GMT
Don't know whether it is related or not, but now I'm desperately jealous of 40k fans. The whole Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar were the guinea pigs tested on by GW to make sure the transition of 40k into a more profitable, newbie-friendly edition (yet still appealing to the old guards) is an absolutely success. But to look on the bright side, the relentless scaremongering on those marine lads during the past two years had been hilarious though I think you are right. 40K seems to be set for a smoother transition. They didn't need to reboot the setting however which is part of the angst. On the other hand primaris marines are probably not a great idea IMO. But scale creep has happened gradually over the last 30 years so I guess it makes sense to have an actual reason why the new marines are actually bigger then old toys (and rules that make them better) That's in contrast to many other WFB minis that grew over the editions from expensive metal to cheaper plastic without any in game effect. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2017 19:57:39 GMT
I'm convinced the Primaris Marines are more of a cash grab on GW's part. They've gotten to the point where there's so many Marine kits out there that they HAD to do something like that in order to get people to actually buy more Marines.
There's crazies out there who will swap their entire armies out for Primaris Marines just so they're more "in scale" with other armies. Primaris Marines are the size that Marines always should have been.
In all honesty it's a huge turnoff for me and one of the reasons I always ended up quitting 40k. 80% of the battles were always Marines fighting Marines; boring. They're cool as hell though (I have a small Raven Guard army, but it's for 30k where Marine v Marine is expected)
|
|
