3d printers are coming along nicely.

[dashneeb]

Not enough in the game world to make it relevant.  It's a sad but true case.

 

If you don't believe me, tell me why all the hate for GW prices hasn't led to a price break in years?

[WestRider]

Yeah, price affects demand. If GW listed that same Wraithknight for $1200, they'd only sell a handful. But there's a lot of room to mess around before you get into those cases where it's clear-cut, and so far, GW doesn't seem to think that dropping their prices significantly would get them enough extra business to make it up on volume. I kind of think that at the moment, they're right, since the pool of people who can afford this stuff at all is, at best, stagnant right now, but a larger percentage of the people who can afford it at all can afford it at pretty much any cost.

[dashneeb]

Data from game companies show that they survive a recession, and people are willing to pay a premium.  So yes, a $1200 Wraithknight would only see a couple units sold, but GW isn't stupid, and would realize that they can only make so many of them at that price so there'd be enough to fulfill orders.

 

I think GW is working on trying to be competitive in at least the releases category, because they see what having constant releases can do for revenue.  They're slow to respond, but they will adjust to trends. However, they're not changing the game style, i.e. they're not making a CCG style marketing system ala Warmachine. 

 

However, the fact that while GW goes up and down, a bunch of other smaller companies offering minis for better prices shows that there's a demand for more games with plastic army men.  Hence, why things like Kickstarter do relatively well because people essentially get huge discounts on models up front.

[intrizic]

Not enough in the game world to make it relevant.  It's a sad but true case.

 

If you don't believe me, tell me why all the hate for GW prices hasn't led to a price break in years?

Because the GW business plan is the end all be all of business genius.

 

tell me why all the new table top players are playing X-wing in my FLGS and not 40k

[fluger]

Because the GW business plan is the end all be all of business genius.

 

tell me why all the new table top players are playing X-wing in my FLGS and not 40k

I would hazard to guess that the brand has a huge impetus for drawing new players to Star Wars.  

[intrizic]

I would hazard to guess that the brand has a huge impetus for drawing new players to Star Wars.  

nothing do with with the price at all.....

[fluger]

Price helps, of course, but I've literally been hearing these same things since I started in this hobby in 1997.  Do you remember WarZone or Confrontation or all the other GW-killer games that have come and gone?   Yes, Fantasy Flight is great, and so are the makers of several other games, but at the end of the day, GW models still get bought.  

 

This [big bad swear word] is metal/plastic crack.  People who want to play, find a way to buy this stuff.  I'm barely scraping by as it is and I still find money to put into the game in bits and pieces here and there.  I also rely on the generosity of the community (for which I am eternally grateful).  

 

As expensive as it is, it still is about the cost of most entertainments in the US.  

 

Also, growth isn't always a blessing, I thought this was a really insightful article about that:  http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/08/07/growth-the-challenges-of-making-money/

[pretre]

I still have Warzone plastics! They're great for conversions.

[dashneeb]

It's difficult to take what's playing at a local game store as "what's the best selling item."  Because more than likely, the grand majority of people who play something don't play it at the game store.  In fact, I think in the last two years I can count the times I played at a store on one hand.  Yes, people right now are flocking to X-wing, and FFG is doing a great job with it.  

 

I'm not saying GW's business plan is the end all be all for game manufacturers, far from it.  However, for miniature games, they're the big dog on the block, and make more than the rest.  

[Guest]

Not enough in the game world to make it relevant.  It's a sad but true case.

 

If you don't believe me, tell me why all the hate for GW prices hasn't led to a price break in years?

I think it's because GW has a firm hold on dictating demand for their products, despite being the supplier. Example is how models with good rules sell really well, even if they have bad models...This combines with strong arm legal tactics, to prevent other companies from filling the demand they create.

 

I'd also note that GW has been blindly issuing copyright lawsuits for years, despite, as chapterhouse proved, GW having a very weak grasp of US copyright law. It will be interesting to see how this impacts the GW monopoly on models for GW games.

[intrizic]

It's difficult to take what's playing at a local game store as "what's the best selling item."  Because more than likely, the grand majority of people who play something don't play it at the game store.  In fact, I think in the last two years I can count the times I played at a store on one hand.  Yes, people right now are flocking to X-wing, and FFG is doing a great job with it.  

 

I'm not saying GW's business plan is the end all be all for game manufacturers, far from it.  However, for miniature games, they're the big dog on the block, and make more than the rest.  

Well, in this day and age there is this thing called Facebook.  FLGS have come to use 'The Facebook' to talk about events and what games people are playing.  If someone were to use 'The Facebook' they could keep a relevant tab on what's being played in FLGSs, that's if they didn't want to turn a blind eye.  

 

So price point doesn't matter eh?  Let's talk about MTG.  40k have a SIX YEAR HEAD START on MTG, and I'm sure some of you thought if would be a fad as well, but now MTG is much MUCH bigger than 40k, with much better support from the parent company.

 

X-wing isn't a trend, and I'm looking at what's drawing the younger crowd.  There are FAR more kids playing X-wing than there are playing 40k.  ok, i can count the number of times I've played outside of a game store on one hand, we even?  Why do you think GW has been pumping out the 'starter packs'?  To sell mini rule books?  They are GWs best sellers, and it's about value to dollar.

 

You are correct, GW is the big dog on the block, and their model kits are beyond compare for anything mass manufactured, they do good models.  But the cracks are starting to show...

[dashneeb]

There are always jumps up and down with GW, but it's also more scrutinized.  Listen, I'm not at all defending GW or their practices, I'm simply a realist.  MTG has a much lower barrier for entry, and is easier played than GW games.  It's comparing apples and oranges really.  Because Magic had a fifteen year head start on Yu-Gi-Oh, and it sells better than MTG, usually.

 

GW copyright issues are because they vigorously defend their IP.  Whether you like it or not, you can go look at the Hex/Magic copyright lawsuit and see what happens when you tread in someone else's water.

 

As for the good rules/models debate, that's even debatable.  Space Marines, which are by far the most numerous player base, has mediocre rules.  Skaven for example, are often considered by far the most busted rules in Fantasy, and are the worst selling army.

[pretre]

You are correct, GW is the big dog on the block, and their model kits are beyond compare for anything mass manufactured, they do good models.  But the cracks are starting to show...

I'm pretty sure I can find almost this exact post in a newgroup from 15 years ago. :)

[fluger]

X-wing isn't a trend, and I'm looking at what's drawing the younger crowd.  There are FAR more kids playing X-wing than there are playing 40k. 

 

I don't think it's a trend, but it is also potentially a new market.  It's a space flight simulation game compared to a small-scale combat game.  I think we could compare GW's lack of success with Battlefleet Gothic and compare it to X wing.  Better comparison.  

 

I honestly don't get to the stores as much as I used to, so I can't really say with a certainty what's happening, but I really think that GW's games have a staying power because they have built their IP up so well over the years.  

 

Do I think they could do better?  Absolutely.  Do I wish they had lower prices and better entry-point models to draw in people?  CERTAINLY!  Do I think that 40k is at some kind of crossroads that it is going to go under or change tack because of Privateer Press/FFG/whoever makes infinity?  

 

I think the market has shown that variety works for people.  Looks at how brands have changed in the last 20 years?  In the 80s, there were two flavors of Doritos.  Now there are like 20.  This all started because companies figured out that instead of trying to make one thing that would appeal to the most people, they could make lots of things that appealed to various people.  I think miniatures games are discovering this and other companies are filling niches that GW has left vaccant.  For better or worse, the games that are succeeding seem to be games that GW started up and then abandoned.  Xwing/BFG, Infinity/Necromunda, Dropzone Commander/Epic, Malifaux/Mordheim.  And so on.  No one has tried to unseat 40k until Mantic, and we'll see how that goes.  

 

Anyway, like I said, I've heard and seen this for years, yes there are new challengers in similar spheres, but GW games sell because people want to buy them, look at the all the special edition crap that sold like gang-busters and just has a pretty cover.  We're all idiots for spending money on these models, honestly.  :D  

[Guest]

As for the good rules/models debate, that's even debatable.  Space Marines, which are by far the most numerous player base, has mediocre rules.  Skaven for example, are often considered by far the most busted rules in Fantasy, and are the worst selling army.

Seems like two bad examples.

 

SM are popular for, maybe three core reasons: 1st, they have amazing GW rules support with the most frequent FAQ and codex updates over any other army (I'm putting all the marines in one group here, not just Codex: sm, but all those marines in power armor), 2nd Marines are by far one of the easiest to win with armies around, especially via players with little experience. They have a very low entry fee (list dependent) and a low intial level of understanding required to use the army. The army is extremely forgiving. Marines have a very player preference friendly playstyle. 3rd, Marines are the oldest army for the game, or one of the oldest. If you say that each faction gains x followers per year, then the older armies will have more followers. Being an older army is also a good sign that their model line will not be dropped like squats, space slann or sisters (joke on the last one).

 

Skaven, on the other hand, are a very demanding army with a very high time requirement to paint and assemble. I'd peg them as a high learning curve with tough entry level enjoyment, though I haven't played them. Most of their box sets represent a very small portion of an army, due to the cheap nature of the points cost for things. They have no ability to field small armies. They have an inflexible play style. I also think many of the GW painted skaven armies are rather similar in appearance, leaving a bland customization feel to the army.

[Guest]

You are correct, GW is the big dog on the block, and their model kits are beyond compare for anything mass manufactured, they do good models.  But the cracks are starting to show...

This may be true, though I do think that the target audience of GW games has also become dramatically larger in the last few years. It is possible that they are not cracking, and just that the market is large enough where even small dogs have impressively sized target audiences.

 

I don't think MTG is a fad, never have. I am surprised that pokemon is still present, as I am with yugioh, I had both of those pegged as fads.

 

I remain unclear with attack wing, as I've noticed that SW themed games tend to be ditched by their parent company, rather than remaining a full game. Might be a thing of the past. Very unsure on that star trek one, too. Give them a few years, see if they stay.

 

I was also surprised that warmachine and hordes stuck around. Mind you, the original concept of big mechs warring seems to have been ditched for a 40k-like army of infantry and a few mechs. They used to brag about the metal content of their models, and seem to have forgotten that with their plastics now. I do play this game, now.

 

Pathfinder and 5th d&d were a surprise. I hadn't expected both games to survive the split.

[dashneeb]

I'd actually counter with:

 

Space Marines are iconic.  They're the ones that are the flagship group of Games Workshop.  Maybe, just Maybe, Marines get the most updates and choices BECAUSE they sell the best.  Maybe because at one GT I saw sixteen people playing, 13 were playing some flavor of marine army.  Maybe it's because they continue to sell so well, head and shoulders above the others that GW is continuing to RIDE THE HORSE that pulls the money wagon?  All the things you said are true.  They're cheaper (generally speaking) to get into the game with, they're easier and more forgiving, and they have a friendly play style.  Yes, they're one of the oldest armies out there, but remember they were on the cover of the first book.

 

Skaven I'd absolutely agree.  They require tons of models.  That, and they're an actual genuine honest to goodness non-Tolkein style race.  The Ratmen concept was something pioneered by GW.  So yes, not entirely easy to play, requires tons of models, but also not something you find in non-GW books as a race really.  But again, they counter that with "look at these amazingly broken rules" and they still don't sell well.  So it's obviously not about rules, it's more about models.

[dashneeb]

The problem with any Star Wars game is that it's licensed, and therefore whenever the license goes away, so will the game.

 

Mini's gamers are an odd group that most won't continue to play a game when the game "dies".  Mostly because they want something that is supported and changing.  Case in point: Clan War.  Was an awesome game. Had some very interesting rules and I liked their combat system way more than I did Fantasy.  However, AEG pulled the plug and the game died.  Still had solid rules and a great experience with a wide variety of things you could do, but it just didn't have people care once said plug is pulled.

[Guest]

But again, they counter that with "look at these amazingly broken rules" and they still don't sell well.  So it's obviously not about rules, it's more about models.

I didn't mean it was just rules, just that GW could create the demand for their own supply.

 

Though I do think that skaven are a horrible army from a cost standpoint. They are demanding in models, time, and effort to learn. I've encountered players making a 10x10 block of skaven as a single unit int their army, which is madness from stance of GW still selling them in packs of 20, then needing to assemble and paint.

 

For contrast, a well painted and completed skaven army is much more respected than any other army just due to the vast painting and assembly requirements. And, as mention, they do have some impressive rules.

 

I think skaven go down to the idea of GW increasing the model cost and less people buying. 5 boxes of clanclats for a unit is unassembled at $175 for a single unit.

[intrizic]

I'm pretty sure I can find almost this exact post in a newgroup from 15 years ago. :)

And you think the elimination of GW stores, the collapse of the GW tournament scene, GWs inability/unwillingness to make new games, the rise of half a meeeellion new indi gaming companies and the latest legal battles are signs of strength?  I don't

[intrizic]

There are always jumps up and down with GW, but it's also more scrutinized.  Listen, I'm not at all defending GW or their practices, I'm simply a realist.  MTG has a much lower barrier for entry, and is easier played than GW games.  It's comparing apples and oranges really. 

but it's not, it's all the entertainment dollar, which is the most volatile dollar in most peoples budget.  Do I go see the Sounders whoop FC Dallas's ass in the playoffs OR buy a new unit of Tac Marines?  Do I go see the Guardians of the Galaxy OR buy a new unit of Tac Marines?  Do I pay for a yearly subscription to World of Warcraft or buy a Wraithknight?  Do I buy a sealed box of MTG or a WraithKnight?  Do I buy that awesome new Kickstarter board game OR do I buy a LandRaider?

 

It's apples to apples in my opinion, based upon myself and what I've seen the people around me do.

 

and I won't even touch your Yo gi ho comment :D  I know of, for a fact, 3 FLGS that make their living from MTG.

 

Now let's talk about what GW is selling you....

 

How many here are collectors?  Do you name all your models?  Do you paint them all up, each and every one of them, to the very best of your ability? Do you display them in your home?  In the living room or dining room?  How many models that you have assembled and painted merely sit on your shelf because you bought it with the intention of painting and displaying the model, with no intent on playing the piece?  Because if you do, then, in my opinion, you are buying GWs product, a collectible, and this is what GW thinks they are selling you.

 

In my opinion, these forums are much more focused on games.  I'm not saying cool models get no play, far from it, but I am saying that the focus that I see from members of the table top community that I am exposed to is the gaming, not the collecting.  In fact, I see some shame when it comes to having 'too many models'.  

 

For me, I buy game pieces, that's all they are to me, that's all they will ever be.

 

 

[fluger]

For me, I buy game pieces, that's all they are to me, that's all they will ever be.

 

This is definitely true for me as well, but, again, how many people bought the ludicrously overpriced special edition books and stuff?  

 

All that being said, I'm part of the problem, because the next purchase I make for "GW" models is going to be through Yoymart.  

[CaptainA]

Having been running more tournaments lately, I feel bad for FLGS's in terms of profit and GW. The models should be decent for them (although I hear it is a nightmare that they have to maintain certain minimums to be have a wholesale account at GW, which is why many small shops don't carry it). But it seems even worse on the event side. MTG pack people in and only require a table to house 4 people. Two 40k tables take up the same space as 6-8 MTG (or any other card game).

 

The Guardian Cup was a 2-day event and had 34 participants at $35. That's $1190. Even if all of it goes to prize support in the form of gift certs, that's like 500-700 for the store. There was a MTG booster draft that ran three of them at Guardian that same weekend. Each one had 100+ players at $25 each head. Even at 300 peeps that is $7500, so 3-5 grand depending upon booster wholesale cost. Sobered me up right quick about how much space we take and how much we actually bring into the store....

[pretre]

And you think the elimination of GW stores, the collapse of the GW tournament scene, GWs inability/unwillingness to make new games, the rise of half a meeeellion new indi gaming companies and the latest legal battles are signs of strength?  I don't

I think that they are doing fine. I didn't say that things are exactly the same as 15 years ago; I said that people have been saying the same crud for 15 years (GW is showing cracks, going down, blah de blah) and they are still here. In 5 years, guess what? Still here.

[intrizic]

I think that they are doing fine. I didn't say that things are exactly the same as 15 years ago; I said that people have been saying the same crud for 15 years (GW is showing cracks, going down, blah de blah) and they are still here. In 5 years, guess what? Still here.

you're starting to sound like Morpheus from the Matrix.... AND WE ARE STILL HERE !!!!!