PDA

View Full Version : Open letter to GW



Heimdallr
08-02-2014, 15:01
To whom it may concern........or not.


I have been involved in the hobby for almost 18 years and spent much of my time and treasure on your products. I realise that this probably won't be read but I feel like I have to say something. I fear that the direction GW has taken is going to lead to the slow death of a company that has provided great joy to many people.


GW's choice to see it's customers as nothing more than a nuisance with a bank account is to the company’s detriment, the choice not to embrace the internet and social media is a mistake, many of your competitors have embraced social media and involve their customers through the use of forums, they get involved with their customer base, both new and current. As GW is no longer THE company that produces miniatures many people are turning to your competitors, in fact one of your competitors is based on the same site as your HQ and are constantly expanding their miniature range and games. It is a sad fact that many people are turning away from GW because of the company’s refusal to engage with it's customer base and, I know you don't want to hear this, the prices. £30 for ten miniatures is too much and the company is pricing many people out, if there were more miniatures in the box you might be able to get away with it, but for £30 with one of your competitors you can walk away with 40 to 60 high quality plastic miniatures. Surely you want to prevent customers exclusively shopping on auction sites for your products?


I know that the opinion or concerns of one customer is of no interest to the company but I do not want to see the company fail because I genuinely enjoy the universe created by GW. You only need to glance at a hobby forum to see the despair that has gripped GW fans, they are leaving for other game systems in droves. I think the company really needs to get involved with its customer base, hire someone to monitor an official GW forum or social media sites, take criticism on the chin, don't just ignore the fan base. It is understood that you need to protect your IP but the actions taken have given GW the reputation of a bully, also forcing gaming websites to stop using your products was an odd step because, one it was free advertising and two it created new customers! All your customers know that at the end of the day the goal is to make a profit selling miniatures like any other company, but surely to increase profits you want to bring more people into the fold and keep existing gamers, instead people are actively looking elsewhere to get their gaming fix, surely based on the end of year financial report its obvious that GW is haemorrhaging customers.





Yours sincerely,


A concerned customer

Danny76
08-02-2014, 18:30
Dear customer,

We are extremely sorry to hear of your unhappiness. As you can imagine we have gone in the direction we think best for the company, and understand that it may not be the right thing in a certain amount of peoples views.
We hope you reconsider our illustrious gaming company.

Regards,
Team GW

Pad out with reasoning of cost to produce increasing, premium product and several other (probably valid for industry) reasons, profit being down because of the large infusion of money into bettering the company. And that's the reply..

I'd think anyway..

soullessginger
08-02-2014, 18:36
I'm sure this has come up before on one of these forums. I agree with what your saying, but they will give you a polite answer, if at all, then put it in the bin and continue on their current course, they are still making a profit after all.

duffybear1988
08-02-2014, 22:00
Don't waste your time - they aren't going to change. I used to think it was because they didn't know how... now I think they just don't care! As long as they get suckers buying the overpriced figures, books and magazines they won't give a damn.

My advice - get out now and go and play something else. There are plenty of other games that are just as good, if not better, so try one of those (with the money saved you could probably try most of them).

Dr Zoidberg
08-02-2014, 22:07
The only way they may possibly change is by hitting them where it hurts the most - their wallets.

Writing them letters may make you feel better, but it won't effect change unfortunately.

nosebiter
08-02-2014, 22:16
Don't waste your time - they aren't going to change. I used to think it was because they didn't know how... now I think they just don't care! As long as they get suckers buying the overpriced figures, books and magazines they won't give a damn.

My advice - get out now and go and play something else. There are plenty of other games that are just as good, if not better, so try one of those (with the money saved you could probably try most of them).


Agree.

Run, run for the hills, where honey flows and the clouds are made of pink fluffy sugar stuff :-)

zoggin-eck
09-02-2014, 00:18
Open letter time again? I think GW already know that there are competitors and that they charge more for their product.

Abaraxas
09-02-2014, 01:56
Remember the last lot of open letters to John Blanche and Jervis from a while back?
Wow.

Odin
09-02-2014, 12:15
Er, you think Forgeworld are one of GW's competitors? No, they're one of GW's brands.

nealko
09-02-2014, 12:34
I think he's referring to Warlord Games, not FW.

IcedCrow
09-02-2014, 13:42
Dear Games Workshop

I am sad that your prices are too high. I mean, I will gladly go out and drop $500 on an xbox, and then buy a couple of games a month every month for $120... games which I lovingly enjoy for 48-72 hours before I beat them and put them in the bin... but your prices are just too much. I know that I have no issue dropping $2000 on a new alienware laptop that can run high end PC games as well, but damn GW... spending $500 - $800 on an entire army (I do a lot of ebaying and recast sites you see... but $500 is still too much)? I mean yeah I can use that army for years and I can even take the time to slowly accumulate an army but I want it all now and a collection little plastic men aren't worth what a super alienware laptop is!

I think that your rules should be for free. Or a slim paperback that costs about $10. $10 is about right for the rules. Esp considering Mantic pushes theirs for free. You should really consider making your rules free GW.

Your models look great, but they simply cost too much. I think that plastic models should cost at most $0.25 a model. A box of 10 plastic guys shouldn't cost more than $5. I'd consider $10 but only if you gave me the moulds to do my own after that.

Buy in cost for an entire army shouldn't be more than $100, including rules. That would be fair. I think if you do this, that I'd be happy. I realize that your stock holders would be ****** off but I don't care about stockholders. You shouldn't have went public anyway. You should have stayed a small, privately run company.

Because of this I play your competitor's games exclusively now, though I like to hang out on GW boards to vent my anger. I realize that games like warmachine cost about the same as your models do GW, but in warmachine I only need like 15 or 20 models. I don't care about army games GW... why don't you scrap that whole army game you are trying to push only for money and make the game like warmachine. THat would be awesome. The best ever. Or make it like Mantic, where the rules are free and the models are super cheap. You have to compete with your competitors now after all.

Thank you very much for listening. I'm going to go pop a xanax now.

PS - please bring back the squats. Make them metal models. And only cost $5.
PPS - do you know of any cool pirate sites I can get some new games from for free?
I can't wait until I can pirate alienware laptops.

shelfunit.
09-02-2014, 15:09
Dear Games Workshop

I'd rather the original, calm, realistic letter over the (extreme, often laughable) hyperbole in the above.

IcedCrow
09-02-2014, 15:33
You mean the hyperbole isnt realistic?

God dammit

bittick
09-02-2014, 17:30
Dear GW, I can get a hooker in Vegas for much cheaper than a starter force for your new army.

On an unrelated note I intend to purchase no more GW product for the foreseeable future.

Heimdallr
09-02-2014, 18:22
Warlord games


Er, you think Forgeworld are one of GW's competitors? No, they're one of GW's brands.

I was referring to Warlord games.

I did this purely as a way of venting lol! I know they won't ever change.

Odin
09-02-2014, 19:19
I was referring to Warlord games.

Ah, sorry, didn't know about them.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Verm1s
09-02-2014, 20:25
Dear Games Workshop

I am sad that your prices are too high. I mean, I will gladly go out and drop $500 on an xbox, and then buy a couple of games a month every month for $120... games which I lovingly enjoy for 48-72 hours before I beat them and put them in the bin... but your prices are just too much.

Are people honestly still peddling that nonsense about the latest computer consoles vs. pieces of plastic?

IcedCrow
09-02-2014, 20:47
Oh yes. Nonsense and gibberish.

Neffer
10-02-2014, 02:25
IcedCrow has a point. Its amazing what we justify as being of value and of not value. I think that the models are expensive say a box of terminators is £28! that's £5.60 for a piece of plastic! But then I'm a big magic the gathering player and I spent £32 on 4 piece's of paper for one of my decks the other day and as Icedcrow said we spend £500 on ps4's and then the games on top! is that not crazy too!

If you really want some one to moan at blame the government and energy companies etc for high taxes and bills and corps for not paying you a living wage lol. Stop picking on the little guys cause there an easy target.

Lothlanathorian
10-02-2014, 02:48
Yeah, he has a point. I can spend $60 and play a game for two years. What a very salient point indeed.

Caiphas Cain
10-02-2014, 04:20
IcedCrow has a point. Its amazing what we justify as being of value and of not value. I think that the models are expensive say a box of terminators is £28! that's £5.60 for a piece of plastic! But then I'm a big magic the gathering player and I spent £32 on 4 piece's of paper for one of my decks the other day and as Icedcrow said we spend £500 on ps4's and then the games on top! is that not crazy too!

If you really want some one to moan at blame the government and energy companies etc for high taxes and bills and corps for not paying you a living wage lol. Stop picking on the little guys cause there an easy target.

Please work on your typing.

Picking even worse examples of value isn't exactly a useful argument, especially when your examples are as poorly chosen as they are. You need to pay for games along with your PS4 just like you need to pay for paints, tools, brushes, etc. for your miniatures, so it's not like that's proven anything. Also, it's funny how people can claim that paying $60 for a video game you play for dozens of hours represents less value than an equally costly miniature. How often do you actually play with that miniature? The answer is not "one game per week so 5 hours per week" like many GW gamers would claim. The vast majority of the time you aren't doing anything with that particular miniature; it just sits there waiting for its turn or dead in your case. I'd guess that an individual unit or miniature gets something like 5 minutes per game (I'm being generous here). Claiming the full game length would be like claiming the time your disk has spent in the tray counts as playtime, so don't try to argue that. So, let's compare, shall we? Let's take a decent single player game that you can play though a few different times and it's still fun, and a box of Terminators. I've actually averaged out the amount of playing time I have per game and that comes to 41 hours per game. How many games of Warhammer would one need to play to get the same amount of playtime with the miniatures? The answer is 492 games, or about nine and a half years of playing one game per week. Suddenly sounding like less of a good example, isn't it?

Lothlanathorian
10-02-2014, 06:41
By the time my most of my friends were talking of having hit 100 hours in Skyrim, I was measuring my gameplay in days (I had a lot of time on my hands). In the 17 years I've been into wargaming, I spent more time playing Skyrim than I have playing Warhammer and it was significantly cheaper. Video games aren't an "I played this for a day, beat it and done" thing anymore and anyone who thinks they are either isn't an actual gamer and doesn't play video games, or, they get games without any sort of multiplayer and trade them in when they are done. The trade in value of a new game is very high which will then affect the over all cost you'd have to factor into playing as it makes subsequent purchases cheaper.

So, in order to make this fair, you'd have to buy your army, paint it, play in a tourney, sell that army and use the money to immediately build a new one or you'd have to buy an army, get it together and play in a tourney every other day for the rest of that year to get the same amount of time out of it as the "average" gamer would a video game. I still play the first Halo, Halo Reach and Halo 4. I play the heck out of CoD: Ghosts and that game cost me nothing because of trade-ins plus a trade-in bonus for "buying it" used.

Comparing Warhammer as a hobby to video gaming as a hobby is like comparing a $20 hamburger* to a $20 steak.






*If that burger isn't made out of angels, $20 is overpriced. That's where I was going with that.

duffybear1988
10-02-2014, 08:36
Yeah you can't really compare PC's/consoles with wargaming. I mean I had a basic budget PC for most of last year and bought Mount and Blade Warband: Napoleonic Wars on Steam during a sale in the summer for about £5. I have now spent 400 hours playing it! It has also got numerous freely available mods for different periods and styles of game that are mostly very professional. So that's 400 hours in just over 7 months for about £140 if I factor in PC cost to build using my old spec. Plus I have the PC for other things as well. £140 worth of GW stuff is a codex, battleforce box and the rulebook. You aren't going to get much use out of that.

AsleepByDay
10-02-2014, 10:03
Alienware is a pretty good comparison for GW, they used to sell a quality product, now they stick £500 worth of components in a custom case and charge £2000 for it.

aenimosity
10-02-2014, 12:02
This is why I have too many unpainted minis:

186987

Edit: Yes I am aware that this post makes me look like I have no life. :D

Edit 2: It's free to play now too. Which doesn't stop people hurling money at Valve as hard as they can.

Edit 3: Obviously GW needs to give space marines hats.

williamsond
10-02-2014, 12:15
ooooohhh spacemarine cosmetic hats I think you may have just won the tread...

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 13:08
Skyrim is an extreme example of a very successful game that provides hundreds of hours of gameplay.

Most games are played for 2 or 3 days then discarded or traded off. I don't see video games compared to warhammer as a poor example. Playing one game for two years? That's a very rare thing. Most games you are lucky to get 20 hours of gameplay out of them, and that's part of the review process now when you read any reviews on the games.

And for $60 you get a piece of plastic (the disc) or now in the digital download age, nothing at all physical.

One can buy a warhammer army for about $500 - $600. My buddies personally buy 2 or 3 new games a month for their PCs or consoles. Not counting the cost of the console upgrade itself (which paying $500 for is about equivalent to buying most of an entire army) that's roughly $180 a month video game budget. Multiply that by 12 months in the year. That's nearly $2000 the guys I know spend on video gaming, NOT counting upgrades to their hardware (new PCs, new laptop, new xbox/ps4). Nine games out of 10 they play for a weekend, or a week at most. Even the guys that average $100 a month on games are still spending $1200 just on titles that nine out of ten get played a week or so.

**this of course does not count steam sales, which they also rabidly go into, and while they are getting great deals, they are still plugging at least $100 a month on new titles.

You only need the one army, and that will last you years.

We don't bat an eye at a $2000 annual video game budget.
We scream holy hell at an army costing $500 - $600.

My video gaming has declined much over the years as I have gotten older. I still spend about $500 - $700 or so a year on games, not counting any upgrades to my hardware, which is still the equivalent of snagging an army, and I play most of those games for a week barring titles like Skyrim or Civ V which I play for years but those are not the norm. I am aware that there are some multiplayer games (like team fortress put forth above), WoW, etc... that people have played hundreds of hours on but again... a video game library consists mostly of games that were played for a week or so and then put away.

You yourself may only buy discount games (I know guys like this, they won't spend more than $10 on a game and will wait a year for a game to come down to $10 before buying it) and that's fair enough but that's also not in my experience the norm, and expecting all hobbies to be priced along those lines I feel is not reasonable or realistic.

I've had my chaos army since 1999 for 40k. Not counting the time painting them I have easily played hundreds of games with them over the years. I would say for the $500-$600 they would cost me, that I easily get the mileage out of them. I don't have a single PC game older than a couple of years that I still play.

This doesn't count other hobbies as well... my music hobby I have put well over $15,000 in instruments and it is a laughing meme that describes musicians spending thousands of dollars on gear and driving around in $500 junker cars to play shows where they get paid in gas money.

Or my SCA hobby where I have a couple of thousand sunk into armor.

Or radio controlled airplanes as a hobby where planes can run over $1000.

Or golf where equipment can run over $1000.

Or photography where good cameras easily run into the thousands of dollars, and most photographers I know that do it as a hobby that have spent that cash don't get paid to do their hobby.

Or astronomy with $400 - $600 telescopes.

How about gun collecting? $600 - $800 pistols anyone?

Hunting - goes along with gun collecting above.

Fishing - easily can spend over what an army costs in fishing gear. Doesn't count if you have your own boat, even a small one.

Paintball? My paintball collection rivals the cost of a new army, and most guys I paintball with put about $1000 into their gear and guns. And paintball is a glorified airgun that shoots a plastic paint filled pellet.

RPGs or D&D? I know MANY that have book shelves FULL of books that retail for well over $1000 if not more. I know my personal D&D collection at retail is about worth as much as a car. That doesn't count miniatures, or tiles, or any of the other things people spend money on.

Magic cards? People lining up to buy $80 card cubes on releases. Last release was last weekend and there are high school students shelling out hundreds of dollars for cards. I know a good dozen people that have thousands of dollars tied up in magic cards.

How about fitness? Fitness equipment easily exceeds the cost of an army. My gf is big into trying the iron man. A decent bike can cost over $1000.

The cheapest hobby I think I have is soccer. $100 cleats, a $25 ball, and $25 shin guards.

Toy miniatures by and large is one of the cheapest hobbies that I am involved with. Hobbies are expensive. If one doesn't want to spend a lot of money, then warhammer is probably not a hobby they'd be interested in. I've had hundreds of hundreds of hours of time painting, assembling, converting, and playing with any given army that I own and I have owned several armies for over a decade now where if I break it down to cost on dollar by hours used, that the miniatures trump pretty much everything else I am into barring my musical instruments, which I use daily.

And then you ask people what an acceptable cost would be, and they fire back with slim rules that are either dirt cheap ($10 or so) or downloadable for free like mantic, and $1 a miniature or so, so a box of 10 guys costing $10 and roughly a $100 buy in price. With expectations like that I can see where the white-hot rage is much more clearly.

the_picto
10-02-2014, 13:21
Please work on your typing.

Picking even worse examples of value isn't exactly a useful argument, especially when your examples are as poorly chosen as they are. You need to pay for games along with your PS4 just like you need to pay for paints, tools, brushes, etc. for your miniatures, so it's not like that's proven anything. Also, it's funny how people can claim that paying $60 for a video game you play for dozens of hours represents less value than an equally costly miniature. How often do you actually play with that miniature? The answer is not "one game per week so 5 hours per week" like many GW gamers would claim. The vast majority of the time you aren't doing anything with that particular miniature; it just sits there waiting for its turn or dead in your case. I'd guess that an individual unit or miniature gets something like 5 minutes per game (I'm being generous here). Claiming the full game length would be like claiming the time your disk has spent in the tray counts as playtime, so don't try to argue that. So, let's compare, shall we? Let's take a decent single player game that you can play though a few different times and it's still fun, and a box of Terminators. I've actually averaged out the amount of playing time I have per game and that comes to 41 hours per game. How many games of Warhammer would one need to play to get the same amount of playtime with the miniatures? The answer is 492 games, or about nine and a half years of playing one game per week. Suddenly sounding like less of a good example, isn't it?

It would take me about as long to assemble and paint a box of terminators as it would to complete/get bored of most video games. Sure video game length can vary alot, but many can be measured in a few hours. Then I get to use the terminators in the game. Only using the time I am moving them or rolling dice for them is a bit unfair, they contribute to the army as a whole and the look and feel of the game being played. I can also display the terminators if I feel I did a good job of painting them. Finally, the terminators will hold their value better. If I sold my terminators now I'd probably get more than half what I paid for them, no one is going to give me £20 for halo 3.

An army costs a lot, but I do get a lot of time spent enjoying it.

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 15:37
Toy miniatures by and large is one of the cheapest hobbies that I am involved with. Hobbies are expensive. If one doesn't want to spend a lot of money, then warhammer is probably not a hobby they'd be interested in. I've had hundreds of hundreds of hours of time painting, assembling, converting, and playing with any given army that I own and I have owned several armies for over a decade now where if I break it down to cost on dollar by hours used, that the miniatures trump pretty much everything else I am into barring my musical instruments, which I use daily.

Warhammer can be played with any miniatures from any manufacturer, doing so drastically reduces the cost (often by well over half) without any loss of enjoyment or ability to play the game, so I certainly wouldn't say that someone who doesn't want to spend a lot of money shouldn't be interested in it.
With all the various hobbies you have listed alongside their costs - are there any that instead of spending $xxxx on, you could spend half of it (or often less) with absolutely no loss of enjoyment or capacity to "do" the listed hobby? If not then they are really not analagous to the full price GW vs cheaper models method of playing warhammer.


And then you ask people what an acceptable cost would be, and they fire back with slim rules that are either dirt cheap ($10 or so) or downloadable for free like mantic, and $1 a miniature or so, so a box of 10 guys costing $10 and roughly a $100 buy in price. With expectations like that I can see where the white-hot rage is much more clearly.

Leaving aside the non-existant "rage", I fail to see why you think this can't be the norm, especially considering it's already happening.

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 15:49
Leaving aside the non-existant "rage", I fail to see why you think this can't be the norm, especially considering it's already happening.

This goes alongside musicians, artists, writers, and programmers and how they should work for donations and not charge for their work. Since music, games, and media of pretty much any form is now widely pirated, it has become something that people have gotten used to. Charging for your work has become bad form, or to some people... immoral. It should be available for free with the option to leave a $5.00 tip via paypal. That's not hyperbolic exaggeration either, I see this request often as a software engineer, and as a musician. That we should be working for donations and if our stuff is deemed worthy, some people may chip in $10 or so.


If not then they are really not analagous to the full price GW vs cheaper models method of playing warhammer.

This is arguing for the sake of arguing to me. Yes you can play warhammer for cheaper. You can use cardboard counters if you want to. The whole thing though is that hobbies are expensive.

I *can* play on a set of $100 drums and still be drumming. However, $100 drums sound infinitely crappier than a set of $10,000 professional drums. I *can* play on a cheap $100 learner guitar, but it sounds infinitely crappier than even a mid level $500 recording guitar.

I *can* play video games on an old $250 PC. I have a rig that was new in 2005. I still play modern games on it. They just don't look as good.

I *can* paintball with a cheap $50 gun and a cheap set of goggles.

I *can* get a $100 cheap camera and take pictures with it.

I *can* play warhammer with cardboard counters or crappier looking models that are cheaper. They just don't look as good.

I *can* play cheaper games but I don't get into hobbies and cross examine all of the competitors to find the cheapest. I play warhammer beacuse of the background, aesthetic, and all that entails. It is expensive. The request that it be as cheap as mantic or cheaper and that the rules should all be given away for next to nothing because mantic does it just doesn't sit with me because working for donations is a sure fire way to kill off most creative peoples' interest in providing their product, and to be honest I don't find mantic's work to be that stimulating.

If ever there was a product to be released that provided army-level scale with the same quality GW does but for cheaper, I would definitely consider it. To date, that does not exist.

N1AK
10-02-2014, 15:59
You mean the hyperbole isnt realistic?

God dammit

Seemed pretty realistic to me given some of the stuff posted on here ;) now if you put something about orders being delivered instantly by space marine drop pod that would be clear hyperbole.

N1AK
10-02-2014, 16:12
With all the various hobbies you have listed alongside their costs - are there any that instead of spending $xxxx on, you could spend half of it (or often less) with absolutely no loss of enjoyment or capacity to "do" the listed hobby? If not then they are really not analagous to the full price GW vs cheaper models method of playing warhammer.


It depends on your definition of no loss of enjoyment. Personally I bought Mantic Zombies over GW ones but I wouldn't use Mantics Dwarves over GW ones for example (though I have AoW Dwarves). Additionally if I did, or wanted, to play in GW stores then using alternatives would limit my enjoyment.

There are plenty of people who play golf with affordable clubs, at affordable courses without expensive trainers etc and enjoy their hobby just as much as someone who needs to have the latest putter technology, attends an elite and eye wateringly expensive course and has a top level 'pro' working with them twice a week. My games console of choice is an Xbox 360 and the most recent game I've played was Xcom: Enemy Unknown and I'm perfectly happy, I could afford a proper gaming rig and new games, but not everyone who games would settle for that.

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 16:18
This goes alongside musicians, artists, writers, and programmers and how they should work for donations and not charge for their work. Since music, games, and media of pretty much any form is now widely pirated, it has become something that people have gotten used to. Charging for your work has become bad form, or to some people... immoral. It should be available for free with the option to leave a $5.00 tip via paypal. That's not hyperbolic exaggeration either, I see this request often as a software engineer, and as a musician. That we should be working for donations and if our stuff is deemed worthy, some people may chip in $10 or so.

Not really sure what this rant is on about - the companies that provide free rules do so because they make their money elsewhere, generally on the models. It is a well established way to introduce new customers (and keep older ones) to a game system. If companies wish to do it this way there seems little reason to get angry about it.


This is arguing for the sake of arguing to me. Yes you can play warhammer for cheaper. You can use cardboard counters if you want to. The whole thing though is that hobbies are expensive.

I *can* play on a set of $100 drums and still be drumming. However, $100 drums sound infinitely crappier than a set of $10,000 professional drums. I *can* play on a cheap $100 learner guitar, but it sounds infinitely crappier than even a mid level $500 recording guitar.

I *can* play video games on an old $250 PC. I have a rig that was new in 2005. I still play modern games on it. They just don't look as good.

Indeed, there are good points here, but it is just wrong to say "hobbies are expensive" and many are demonstrably not.


I *can* play warhammer with cardboard counters or crappier looking models that are cheaper. They just don't look as good.

You can also play the game with cheaper, better looking models.


I *can* play cheaper games but I don't get into hobbies and cross examine all of the competitors to find the cheapest. I play warhammer beacuse of the background, aesthetic, and all that entails. It is expensive.

Again, it is expensive because you want it to be expensive, it doesn't have to be.


The request that it be as cheap as mantic or cheaper and that the rules should all be given away for next to nothing because mantic does it just doesn't sit with me because working for donations is a sure fire way to kill off most creative peoples' interest in providing their product, and to be honest I don't find mantic's work to be that stimulating.

It's not just mantic, PP give their rules away for free with the models, and if charging for rules inspires people to create interest in their product then why have most GW games rules not improved/developed over the last 20 years?


If ever there was a product to be released that provided army-level scale with the same quality GW does but for cheaper, I would definitely consider it. To date, that does not exist.

Well, that depends on what you mean by "quality". If it's about the rules then you just need to step outside the Hobby™centre.

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 16:26
Indeed, there are good points here, but it is just wrong to say "hobbies are expensive" and many are demonstrably not.

Well then this goes on that "arguing for the sake of arguing" as there can be no right answer. As there are some hobbies that are not expensive, therefore warhammer should not be expensive is as arguable as some hobbies are expensive so warhammer being expensive is not an issue.


Again, it is expensive because you want it to be expensive, it doesn't have to be.

Not really no I don't *want* it to be expensive. I don't see where I've said I want it to be expensive. It doesn't have to be, but it is. If you want a cheap warhammer, you'll have to wait for a company to put out army-level rules that rival warhammer at a cheaper cost. Right now, the only one I can think of is mantic's Kings of War which I've gone over the rules for and personally have zero interest in. Not because its cheap (free) but because I feel the quality of the rules are shoddy and it is not something I'd enjoy.


It's not just mantic, PP give their rules away for free with the models, and if charging for rules inspires people to create interest in their product then why have most GW games rules not improved/developed over the last 20 years?

I think that the GW rules have improved vastly over where we were in 1994 personally. I couldn't stand the editions in 1994, and the current editions of the game have brought my group more new members than any of the editions between 1994 - 2010.


Well, that depends on what you mean by "quality". If it's about the rules then you just need to step outside the Hobby™centre.

There you go assuming that I only play and know about GW games (because obviously anyone that enjoys the GW hobby is a complete and utter tool that has no experience outside of "teh h0bbyz centre" ;) I have a book shelf full of rules. I've played warmachine, hordes, kings of war, warmaster (GW), the hobbit/LOTR (GW), mechwarrior, EPIC (GW), dropzone commander, x-wing, Hail Caesar, and malifaux in the past couple of years alone. There are no games that exist that I care about that are at the army-level and not the skirmish level that I want to play.

Has nothing to do with "the hobby centre (lololololol)". It has to do with what I spend my free time on, and most of the games above are poor IMO or they do not engage me, or I"m not interested in skirmish level low model count games or games that revolve around super heroes and their powerful combos (or else I'd be a super fan of magic the gathering and warmachine)

williamsond
10-02-2014, 16:29
I think the models from avatars of war are just as good as GW especialy the dwarf stuff a fair bit cheeper too. As for the OP I kind of aggree with your letter but I think the changes we're looking for will never happen with GW's current management culture, the top and bottom of it is they are profit focused and as a PLC thats what is to be expected unfortunatley they don't owe the fans anything the share holders and money men are the only people they are beholden too. I don't like it any more than you do but until their bottom line really takes a dive into the negative profit margins it's what we're stuck with.

Neffer
10-02-2014, 16:57
Please work on your typing.

Ok...Sorry, Laugh out Loud.


it just sits there waiting for its turn or dead in your case.

I seem to have really offend you some how which was not my intention. I was agreeing that Games Workshop is expensive. But different people perceive value in different ways. A lot people think I'm crazy for spending a fortune on magic cards but I really enjoy the game and I enjoy the social aspect of playing at events. I have three fantasy armies and one 40k army (most of which I bought from Ebay) and I enjoy the painting which I have spent hours doing and then, yet again the social aspect. Where as with Computer games...I do play but I just prefer being in a social environment so that is where I would rather sink my money. Some people spend a fortune on cars and I think that is crazy. I know people who go out every weekend spending +£100 plus on drinks and eating out and they think I'm crazy for buying boxes of models for £30. But it has been already said on here I can stick those terminators on ebay and get a good £20 back! I have a copy of the the new tomb raider that i got for free but at the time rrp was £30 and i completed it in 14 hours! I enjoyed it but if I had, had to have paid for it I would have rather spent the money on some Terminators or something.

With any hobby You should be putting into it and getting something back out. If your not then move on.

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 17:19
Well then this goes on that "arguing for the sake of arguing" as there can be no right answer. As there are some hobbies that are not expensive, therefore warhammer should not be expensive is as arguable as some hobbies are expensive so warhammer being expensive is not an issue.

No. I'll agree that some hobbies are expensive, whilst others are not, but to claim "hobbies are expensive" and then argue that arguing against this is "arguing for arguments sake" is wrong, and hypocritical.


Not really no I don't *want* it to be expensive. I don't see where I've said I want it to be expensive. It doesn't have to be, but it is. If you want a cheap warhammer, you'll have to wait for a company to put out army-level rules that rival warhammer at a cheaper cost. Right now, the only one I can think of is mantic's Kings of War which I've gone over the rules for and personally have zero interest in. Not because its cheap (free) but because I feel the quality of the rules are shoddy and it is not something I'd enjoy.

Again, you seem unable to disassociate the rules from the models. The rules are (unnecessarily) expensive, but the game can be played without using the (also unnecessarily) expensive models. If you want cheaper rules than Warhammer then take your pick - no other wargame rules are as expensive. Quality of rules is a different issue, though warhammer's rules are shoddy for their length and tactical options. Claiming that the KoW rules are shoddy is a bit weird as the are written by the same guy who wrote Warhammer 6th edition and are widely regarded as being considerably easier to learn, yet offering considerable tactical depth compared to warhammer. Still, if you have no interest in something it is unlikely that you have any interest in liking it either, regardless of its merits.


I think that the GW rules have improved vastly over where we were in 1994 personally. I couldn't stand the editions in 1994, and the current editions of the game have brought my group more new members than any of the editions between 1994 - 2010.

Had GWs rules changed noticably over the last 20 years I would agree with you, but they have not. Same turn sequence, same stat lines, same attack/defence mechanisms and the same continuing need for errata/FAQs and corrections, often for the same problems edition after edition. The only noticable differences between 1994 and now are random charges and no need to guess distances.


There you go assuming that I only play and know about GW games (because obviously anyone that enjoys the GW hobby is a complete and utter tool that has no experience outside of "teh h0bbyz centre" ;) I have a book shelf full of rules. I've played warmachine, hordes, kings of war, warmaster (GW), the hobbit/LOTR (GW), mechwarrior, EPIC (GW), dropzone commander, x-wing, Hail Caesar, and malifaux in the past couple of years alone. There are no games that exist that I care about that are at the army-level and not the skirmish level that I want to play.

Has nothing to do with "the hobby centre (lololololol)". It has to do with what I spend my free time on, and most of the games above are poor IMO or they do not engage me, or I"m not interested in skirmish level low model count games or games that revolve around super heroes and their powerful combos (or else I'd be a super fan of magic the gathering and warmachine)

I'm glad you enjoy playing GW games, I do as well. The fact remains however that the rules for the two main games are horribly clunky, continuously in need of reworking, not suited to the size of games they are generally targeted at and the games are often horrifically unbalanced due to awful army design.

EDIT: To get this back on topic - you have clearly stated that you love Warhammer/40k etc, this tread is about where GW have gone wrong - their vastly decreasing customer base, reduced sales volumes over the last several years, and drastically reduced revenues and worse profits in the last 6 months being symptomatic of this whilst other wargames have been riding the crest of a wave. Where do you think they have gone wrong, if at all?

EDIT 2: I seem to have been dragged off topic in this thread - I was thinking it was the "where did GW go wrong" thread, apologies to the OP.

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 17:22
Again, you seem unable to disassociate the rules from the models

You're right. I'm but a mere simpleton. A hypocritical simpleton.

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 17:30
You're right. I'm but a mere simpleton. A hypocritical simpleton.

What are you on about? If you are unable to respond like an adult, fine, but I'm sure we would all prefer no response rather than these childish utterances :eyebrows:

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 17:53
When you go into assault mode and start levying charges of one being a hypocrite, and then using aggressive phrases such as one still cannot associate something from something else (which can be construed as "you're stupid") then try to take the moral high ground... it kind of looks a bit foolish :)

ntw3001
10-02-2014, 17:54
Well then this goes on that "arguing for the sake of arguing" as there can be no right answer. As there are some hobbies that are not expensive, therefore warhammer should not be expensive is as arguable as some hobbies are expensive so warhammer being expensive is not an issue.

Not just some hobbies; many comparable products are not expensive. Taking your example of a football kit costing $150 (or so), what if you could get an extremely similar kit for $600? Would you consider that better value? We're talking about injection-moulded plastic sprues, not jewels hand-cut by artisans of legend.

And before we get into discussing all the completely valid and sensible reasons GW has to charge extra, it doesn't matter to me even a tiny bit. I'm a consumer; I don't need to pay for their shops or their distribution network or their shareholders. I don't care about those things; they're not offering me those things. They can pay for them, with the money they get from selling things people want to buy.

As it happens though, I do still spend a little on GW models, because I find them good for kitbashing. But armies, for playing games? Not a chance. As a consumer, and one with a fair deal of goodwill towards GW on account of the old SGs, I can't justify buying into their hobby on the 'game' scale. The $600 football kit is just very obviously a poor purchase.

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 18:00
That argument is a value-based argument, which unfortunately varies from person to person (and cannot have a "right" or "wrong" argument, similarly how liking the color red cannot have a right or wrong assessment attached to it)

It comes down to: do you feel that this model is worth the price they are asking? If no, then don't buy it and find a replacement if you like the game. That could be a competitor's model, a scratch built model, or even a coke can if your group is so inclined. I've got several buddies that play warhammer with perry miniatures. We all have a great time.

Perhaps then the issue is one's values are being, rightfully or wrongfully, pushed onto someone else and hence the argument? That may be the real issue. (esp when someone calls someone else a derogatory for not adhering to that person's values) (and no I am not saying you did that I'm speaking in general, it has happened in this thread and many many others where it was insinuated that one that finds value in GW products is obviously a fan boi, *****, or "less than intelligent")

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 18:05
When you go into assault mode and start levying charges of one being a hypocrite,

When you are claiming that "all hobbies are expensive", then start arguing that me stating this is "arguing for arguments sake", then yes, I stand by that.


and then using aggressive phrases such as one still cannot associate something from something else (which can be construed as "you're stupid")

Nothing "aggressive" in my phrases at all, if you felt there was I apologise.


then try to take the moral high ground... it kind of looks a bit foolish :)

Again, what are you on about? When you post this..


You're right. I'm but a mere simpleton. A hypocritical simpleton. and this
Oh yes. Nonsense and gibberish.

in response to perfectly reasonable arguments/statements then you should expect people to call you out on it.

IcedCrow
10-02-2014, 18:16
in response to perfectly reasonable arguments/statements then you should expect people to call you out on it.

If someone posts aggressive internet-bad*** comments towards me, I will respond in kind.


Are people honestly still peddling that nonsense about the latest computer consoles vs. pieces of plastic?

That was what the gibberish response was to. As you can note, that is also an aggressive post full of bad-assery and virtual muscle flexing that cannot really be conducive to a civil discussion.

The moral high ground would be whipping out words like "hypocrite" and "you seem to have a problem disassociating (which can be translated to: you seem to have a problem not being stupid, your argument is clearly retarded because you are stupid, here let me show you why you are stupid) and then going "why are you upset brah? why you gotta post childish retorts to me using aggressive language at you brah?"

The word hypocrite implies "do as I say not as a I do". I simply stated that there are a ton of hobbies that are expensive. Retorting that "yeah there are hobbies that aren't expensive too so warhammer shouldn't be expensive" is arguing for the sake of arguing to me. Since money seems to be the issue, I listed a varied list of hobbies that were more expensive than warhammer...

I didn't even include drinking on the weekend, which I know several people that dump hundreds of dollars a week into, and then turn around and complain about prices on plastic miniatures :)

So - if an actual discussion can be had, lets do so without resorting to aggressive language wherein we call each other stupid, towels, etc... and have a discussion :)

As it is, this "open letter to GW" is another pricing rant in disguise that will likely get merged with the main pricing thread.

shelfunit.
10-02-2014, 18:21
If someone posts aggressive internet-bad*** comments towards me, I will respond in kind.

Again, nothing aggressive in my post at all.


That was what the gibberish response was to. As you can note, that is also an aggressive post full of bad-assery and virtual muscle flexing that cannot really be conducive to a civil discussion.

Nothing aggressive in that post either, infact I was wondering the same thing myself.

I will bow out of this thread now, there seems little point continuing this discussion beyond being dragged down into your "yes you are" , "no I am not" game.

Brother Asmodeus
10-02-2014, 19:17
Think a mod could do with closing this circular flame thread....

Codsticker
10-02-2014, 20:30
Think a mod could do with closing this circular flame thread....

I agree.

Thread closed.

Codsticker

The Warseer Mod Squad