PDA

View Full Version : Rage Switch Gaming



Eternus
11-01-2012, 07:26
Ok, I'm gonna put this here, though it's a question about all wargames, not just GW games. Has anyone here put aside or stopped playing a game or effectively boycotted a games company because of something they didn't like about that game or company and why?

I know this is something that has happened with 8th edition Fantasy, as some people disliked the new rules set so much they just didn't want to play anymore, but what about other games and other companies?

I ask because I have been playing wargames for nigh on nineteen years, and have always played GW games. I have never 'left Games Workshop' games in favour of another system or game, in fact I have never even had the urge to try another system, though in my area people play Warmachine, Malifaux and various other games. The idea just doesn't appeal to me because I get everything I want from playing GW games, I love the games and the models (though I tend not to buy directly from GW these days, and even use a few minis by other companies in my GW games) and the background is fantastic and one of the things that really keeps me involved.

What are your thoughts?

Chaos and Evil
11-01-2012, 08:24
Well, I found over the years that I wanted an intellectually challenging game experience from my wargames, and that GW's Core Games don't provide that.

So I've put aside GW's Core Games (in fact, sold all my armies) because they don't cater to what I want anymore... GW Core Games are more about "Wacky-Fun" than intellectual challenge.

Satan
11-01-2012, 08:25
I can't remember that I have so far in any capacity, but I'm of a good mind to boycott Bioware, especially the Dragon Age series.

When I played the first one on my PS3 I immediately thought to myself "Hey, they've got something unique here". The game was aimed at adults, there was a good amount of mystery to the darkspawn, and plenty of hard choices to go around regarding some tough subjects. I also felt that the take on the fantasy races in the game had taken some important but good starting steps towards making them more unique.

Then came Dragon Age 2. They re-designed the darkspawn, left out practically every cultural clash and it definitively was not aimed at adults anymore. Also, it was buggy and pretty much unplayable at times. Not to mention the overall total lack of polish. To me, it was just garbage - they'd taken all that promise that the first game had shown and thrown it all down the well.

Now, for the record - I've bought all the DA 2 story DLC released so far, because that's how strong a pull the first game and the novels got on me. I really think the premise and story presented in the first game had alot to be said for it.

It's a bit the same with Warhammer you know? The books and art are at times very adult, whilst the video games tend to become more like a comic relief.

Anyway, then came Skyrim - and disappointment over DA 2 again, because whilst being a very different game (and buggy as well), Skyrim made me feel that large parts of it and its environments/themes/whatnot were what DA 2 could have been, once again confirming to me that they'd done a botched job on it.

The came the Old Republic. I'm not a Star Wars fan - but from what I've seen of it I could tell straight away that they were using the DA 2/Mass Effect engine and I saw the collected scenes of the Sith Twi'lek (or however it's spelled...) which pretty much destroyed my faith in humanity and in the story-telling ability of Bioware once again, reminding me of the awkward, akwarder inclusions of sex in DA 2.

So, next time, no. I won't be pre-ordering the next game in the Dragon Age series.

AndrewGPaul
11-01-2012, 08:48
Ok, I'm gonna put this here, though it's a question about all wargames, not just GW games. Has anyone here put aside or stopped playing a game or effectively boycotted a games company because of something they didn't like about that game or company and why?

No. It seems a bit childish, really. I haven't bought anything new from GW in ages, and I've no great desire to play 5th edition 40K, but I don't see the point in throwing all the toys out the pram. Perhaps if they did something particularly evil I would stop buying from them, but that's that's rather hypothetical at this point. Even then, I don't think I'd get rid of the stuff I currently own.

I have moved on to play other games, but that doesn't mean I need to stop liking the games I liked before.

Hellebore
11-01-2012, 08:49
Way ahead of you Satan. I simply didn't buy DA2 because what I had seen of the gameplay was so childish and the redesign of the world so utterly pointless and in almost all cases worse.

I utterly loathed the DBZ OTT style 'look Ma! I made the bad man EXPLODE!' they employed. Swinging around two handed weapons like they were cardboard. Turning Elven aravels into ACTUAL SHIPS rather than metaphorical 'land ships'. Pathetic zombie hurlocks that visit a pyramid fetishist armourer, stupid gorilla genlocks that can't use all those melee weapons they were mysteriously using in DAO.

I would have forgiven the gameplay if they had left the art alone. But NOOOO they had to redesign most of the core concepts and bizarrely leave others as they were. Emissaries are so scary now looking like floating zombie chinese vampires. :rolleyes:

The fact that they redesigned the magic also ***** me because it actually directly tied into the schools of magic the Circle employed in DAO. Now for no apparent reason different types of damage from within a school are now grouped together into different types of mages.

However I have played the game but never finished it. First game I've never finished. Nothing to drag me back into it. Cue Skyrim and 120 hours of gameplay later and well, yeah.

It was just change for the sake of change, sales for the sake of sales. I've often heard the game referred to as 'Hawke, Janitor of Kirkwall' as you pretty much just spend 10 years cleaning up everyone's mess...

Hellebore

eldargal
11-01-2012, 08:53
I quit 7th ed WFB in disgust after the Dark Elf and DoC books (I play DE).

Really? I have a Twilek Sith Inquisitor that was my alt but has become my main because the story is damned fantastic. I really wouldn't judge based on a few excerpts on youtube.

but from what I've seen of it I could tell straight away that they were using the DA 2/Mass Effect engine and I saw the collected scenes of the Sith Twi'lek (or however it's spelled...) which pretty much destroyed my faith in humanity and in the story-telling ability of Bioware once again, reminding me of the awkward, akwarder inclusions of sex in DA 2.

So, next time, no. I won't be pre-ordering the next game in the Dragon Age series.

Satan
11-01-2012, 09:27
Way ahead of you Satan. I simply didn't buy DA2 because what I had seen of the gameplay was so childish and the redesign of the world so utterly pointless and in almost all cases worse.

I utterly loathed the DBZ OTT style 'look Ma! I made the bad man EXPLODE!' they employed. Swinging around two handed weapons like they were cardboard. Turning Elven aravels into ACTUAL SHIPS rather than metaphorical 'land ships'. Pathetic zombie hurlocks that visit a pyramid fetishist armourer, stupid gorilla genlocks that can't use all those melee weapons they were mysteriously using in DAO.

I would have forgiven the gameplay if they had left the art alone. But NOOOO they had to redesign most of the core concepts and bizarrely leave others as they were. Emissaries are so scary now looking like floating zombie chinese vampires. :rolleyes:

The fact that they redesigned the magic also ***** me because it actually directly tied into the schools of magic the Circle employed in DAO. Now for no apparent reason different types of damage from within a school are now grouped together into different types of mages.

However I have played the game but never finished it. First game I've never finished. Nothing to drag me back into it. Cue Skyrim and 120 hours of gameplay later and well, yeah.

It was just change for the sake of change, sales for the sake of sales. I've often heard the game referred to as 'Hawke, Janitor of Kirkwall' as you pretty much just spend 10 years cleaning up everyone's mess...

Hellebore

Oh yeah, the combat that was supposed to be adapted for consoles. That was also a big :wtf: as it was just button mashing for 33 hrs. On the same button. You'd think the designer had never played on a console in his life. Skyrim shines with heaven's bright light when compared to DA 2 in that area.

It was change for change's sake and for the sake of sales - which is funny because every graph I've seen shows that it was vastly outperformed by DA:O after the first week. Showing that they didn't know what they were doing in that regard. Just a wild guess as to what would sell better rather than any factual groundwork.


I quit 7th ed WFB in disgust after the Dark Elf and DoC books (I play DE).

Really? I have a Twilek Sith Inquisitor that was my alt but has become my main because the story is damned fantastic. I really wouldn't judge based on a few excerpts on youtube.

I don't mean the race or game per se. It might be excellent for all I know. I mean the character called Vette. Look it up on youtube. I'd post a link but I don't know if it'd be breaking the posting guidelines.

It was the storytelling in those scenes, collected together, that made me cringe because it reminded me how DA 2 and how downright awkward and immature it was in that regard, and if that's what their in-game storytelling ability has become (in regards to the subject at hand) then I don't want to play another installment in the Dragon Age series. One of the big hits with the original DA:O was undoubtedly its romances, but DA 2 handled that part, and especially the female characters, in ways that made me cringe and think about American Pie movies.

eldargal
11-01-2012, 09:32
Oh, Vette, I've not done her romance (on account of female PCs not being able to romanc female companions and I don't make male characters) so I couldn't say. But in general I've found the story writing to be really high, as a Sith I've become incredibly paranoid of everything, thats how immersive it is.:rolleyes:

Ozorik
11-01-2012, 10:06
I have never 'rage quit' but if I don't like a game what's the point in playing it?

Scythe
11-01-2012, 10:19
No, I have never actually had a moment in which I 'quit' a wargame. But lately, I have found that I stick around with GW more because of the hobby aspect than the gaming aspect, so there's that...
What I do have noticed is my actual desire of playing a game declining, which directly results in playing a game less or not at all. Fantasy basically died for me at the end of 7th edition, after releases like DEs, VCs, and Daemons (two of those armies I play myself, mind) in which I basically stopped playing. 8th edition reset the game, and my interest in fantasy resurfaced, resulting in more games and an army. Likewise, I also lost most interest in playing 5th edition 40k. The Tyranids book was not very good, but the ridicules Grey Knights book (one of my other armies) made me lose all interest in the army, and the game in lesser degree (not helped by books like Space Wolves and Blood Angels either).

Outside wargames... I know some people who detest the New World of Darkness line of White Wolf (roleplaying), and heard similar things about the 3.5/4th edition D&D switch.
I also know someone who prefers 2D video games (inc the stuff in old running franchises, like mario and zelda) to all that 'modern' 3D stuff these days, but I don't know if that would count :p

Kaptajn_Congoboy
11-01-2012, 10:57
Never really rage quit anything, just slowly drifted away from it.

SW:TOR is pretty good story-wise; it does not have the immersion of Mass Effect or good old KOTOR (I fell of DA in the first game, I fear) but it is quite engaging, still. Its only big problem is not tied to the game itself, but to the weird dichtonomies of the setting: either play oh-so-evil clowns or oh-so good policemen when you choose factions, and then make moral choices that are either oh-so-evil or oh-so-good within the respective faction storylines. Not that ME really is all that much better at it, but the SW Universe really lends itself to black and white....

Bloodknight
11-01-2012, 11:07
Not really ragequitting, but GW effectively killed off the general viability of my army by not releasing an 8th edition errata for it (I used to play Dogs of War, have about 12.000 points of them. With no official working ruleset I can't go to a tourney with them, which also tends to affect the acceptance of armies in most private groups), so I stopped playing WFB. I just couldn't see the point in shelling out a lot of money for a new rulebook just to have to do some massive reworking of my DoW army into an Empire and a Marauder heavy Chaos army (which I'm not interested in anyway...if I were I'd have played Empire from the start, not DoW, same for WoC).

The same might happen with 6th edition 40K, but I sure hope it won't. That said, I played 40K twice last year and used to play it weekly. I somehow lost interest after 16 years and went back to my first love, BattleTech, which, thanks to Megamek, I play a game of nearly every day. Haven't played it on the tabletop in years, but I still buy the minis and the odd book.

Verm1s
11-01-2012, 11:11
I'm with C&E. I haven't 'quit' GW core, so to speak (still got an army or two to complete), but I've drifted on to other games that aren't quite as clunky, list-dependent, line-up-and-charge kind of thing...


the background is fantastic and one of the things that really keeps me involved.

And this.

lbecks
11-01-2012, 11:11
DA2 was horrendous. DA1 was the KOTOR successor i always wanted. And then bioware had the smart idea of catering solely to console gamers who found DA1 too difficult and made the super dumbed down half baked DA2. The reused levels, imported textures from 1, useless items that didn't even have pictures, and the writers that didn't even paying attention to anything in DA1 was ridiculous. I get angry just thinking about DA2.

At least there's Skyrim now. I like Skyrim.

Satan
11-01-2012, 13:09
DA2 was horrendous. DA1 was the KOTOR successor i always wanted. And then bioware had the smart idea of catering solely to console gamers who found DA1 too difficult and made the super dumbed down half baked DA2. The reused levels, imported textures from 1, useless items that didn't even have pictures, and the writers that didn't even paying attention to anything in DA1 was ridiculous. I get angry just thinking about DA2.

At least there's Skyrim now. I like Skyrim.

As a console player, DA 2 was not an improvement for console in any way whatsoever.

rodmillard
11-01-2012, 13:58
Not exactly "Ragequit", but I skipped D&D 4th when I found out they had bought back the rights to the Dragonlance Setting from Sovereign Press and would not be supporting it in the new edition (my group are still playing 3.5). From what I've heard I didn't miss much.

Napalm
11-01-2012, 14:12
Well, I stopped playing GW for a few years, when Space Marine II & 40kV2 died mostly because of the rules I didn't liked at all (Epic 40k et 40k 3rd).
I'm back playing GW since a few years, and I would say more than ever: WH fantasy, Netepic, Bloodbowl, BFG, and sometimes 40k V5 (still better than the ugly 3rd).
I also play some other games, like flames of war (and other 15mm WWII games, the cool things with historical you can switch games with the same minis).
When I'm bored with warhammer fantasy I play BFG or Epic, when I'm bored with Epic I paint historical... and I switch regularly, same for painting.

If your army is not supported or have crappy rules, just wait, it will be better in a future edition :p (except if you play wood elves of course).

MarcoSkoll
11-01-2012, 14:26
I quit buying from GW and their retailers back in around May. Not, however, that I've stopped playing GW games - I've got a lot of stuff from more than a decade of collecting and I still use it as the mood takes me.

But, as I didn't see much GW were going to offer me in future beyond bad rewrites, codex one-upmanship and a hundred different Mary Sues, the (then) impending price-hike right as they switched to a less expensive material, general unfriendliness towards Specialist Gamers and other lack of loyalty to their customers meant it was time to look elsewhere.
So, at the moment, I'm slowly starting Infinity, in between working on an Inquisitor collection made from second-hand models, other manufacturers and scratch-builds. (Mostly scratch-builds)

Not exactly quitting their games (if you count FFG's licences, even less so) but as far as GW's coffers need be concerned, I'm now essentially an ex-customer. An ex-customer who likes (some) of the games and most of the background (at least where they haven't been scrawling on it with crayon), but an ex-customer nonetheless.

Osbad
11-01-2012, 14:30
I don't buy stuff (models, rules, accessories) that I consider not to be good value for money. And I don't play games systems that I don't enjoy. That's not rage quitting though, that's just normal consumer economics at work.

Ranting over the internet (or to friends) about the evil overlord's games company that has brought about changes that I dislike and made stuff so expensive that it is no longer value for money where it used to be before, and made games systems less enjoyable to play than they used to before.... now that I've done in spades! ;)

Spider-pope
11-01-2012, 16:28
I suppose you could say i boycott Mantic, but thats less out of any business practice they employ and more because everything they have produced so far is derivative, ugly crap.
And i stopped playing World of Warcraft after Activisions attempt to reveal its customers personal information publicly in order to facilitate a Facebook deal.

But thats about it really. I've never dropped a wargaming system because of a company change or ruleset change, at most i've taken a break from playing a system for a while. The only game i've dropped recently is Warmahordes, but that was solely because since my local gaming store shut i can't get a game regularly enough to justify spending money on it.


As a console player, DA 2 was not an improvement for console in any way whatsoever.

I played the console version of DA1 for the most part and i have to agree with you, DA2 didnt improve anything really. The only sequel thats come as close to disappointing me since is Gears of War 3.

General Veers
11-01-2012, 17:02
I have rage quit using some dice. Handed them over to a friend. Regarding games I simply quit and move on to others.

paddyalexander
11-01-2012, 17:37
I didn't "rage quit" 40k & Fantasy, rather I gave up playing them for what I feel are better games made by companies that I find treat their customers/communities better than gwPLC.

I've never been a "gw hobbiest tm", always having played other games system alongside gwPLC systems. Often a game system from a different manufacturer would grab my attention and become the center of my hobby for a few weeks or months but I would always return to 40k, Battlefleet Gothic or Necromunda because I loved that universe.

It was Warmachine & the Iron Kingdoms RPG setting that finaly broke that cycle. At first it started out as a secondary game to 40k and quickly replaiced it as my primary game system. I love the evolving story of the wargame and the intricate/deep world it is set in trough the RPG books.

But importantly the rules were great and are better now after the public field tested update. I very rarely get into rule arguements in a game of Warmachine or Hoardes, compared to at least one rules arguement per game (even in "friendly" games) of 40k & Warhammer I have ever played over 12 years that I used their systems. I realised that with PPs' games I was having fun because of the rules, with gwPLC games I was having fun in spite of the rules.

I could have carried on occasionally playing gwPLCs' games as secondary systems but the behavior of the company towards its' customers supporters as well as a complete absence of balance in its "core" gaming systems ment I could easily drop it.

When I miss the 40k universe I simply play Dark Herasey, a fantastic Fantasy Flight Games RPG system. I am hoping they don't integrate the "updated" background material from the last couple of codexes but I can always simply ignore those expansion books.

Right now the wargames I am playing are mainly Warmachine & Hoardes but also Malifaux, Firestorm Armada, Dystopian Wars, Infinity & a number of different historical rulesets and I've never been happier or more fulfilled by my hobby.

Scaryscarymushroom
11-01-2012, 18:12
At times I have been dissatisfied with the variety of products that GW sells, including their rules; aside from their business practices.

The steep cost of GW's products has also led me to look elsewhere, and I don't mean the cost of their minis! I mean, to play a new army, not only do you need new minis, but you need a new rulebook too. Other games don't have this issue, because either the system is small enough that the rules for all the minis are included in the main rulebook, or their rules are included when you buy the model.

Don't get me wrong. In my opinion, a lot of GW's models are a great value and I enjoy 40k, which is (aside from Fury of Dracula) the only GW game to date that I have played. But other companies are also capable of producing good products. Just like I didn't "ragequit" I also didn't blind myself to the possibility of good things outside of warhammer because of fanboyism.

Skaven13
11-01-2012, 19:03
Well, I am probably going to be laughed right out of the forums for admitting half of the stuff I am going to say here, but here it goes. My recent ragequit had to do with the Mortal Kombat franchise. I have been a fan since the first game in the 90s. Many can discuss the gameplay aspects (which a lot of people say took a turn for the worse since MK4), but I actually fell in love with the imagery and the characters. It seemed to me there was a lot of wasted potential there, but they were starting to get their imagery and depth back with MKD (the artwork, music, and character design were all brilliant). Then came MKA, which was just a chaotic mass of "let's throw every character in here in one game and see what happens". MK vs DCU I am not even going to bring up.

I saw the trailer for this new MK that came out last year and I got really excited, until I started to see more and more character reveals. A few of the characters they really got right, but some, especially Scorpion (how much costume CAN we cram into a costume?) and the female characters in particular made me wonder what in the world they were thinking. According to Warner Brothers (or, in research, just about ANY entertainment company now), appropriate, and deep, female character design consists of a bikini, or lingerie, no matter WHAT the character's alignment, or role in the game. So, the character Kitana went from being an assasin to a bikini model, Jade went pretty much the same route except they threw a poledance in there as her winning pose (exactly what comes to mind whenever I ever thought of Jade's character...), oh and every single female had to increase their cup sizes about 4 times (we later found out that it seems the reason they all appear the same is because they ARE the same....the exact same female model is being used for all the female characters, just different skin tacked on). There is one picture out there where the character Sindel was jumping straight up doing a kick, and I swear those things they gave her on her chest will defy the laws of physics if they don't bounce up and hit her in the face. I understand sex appeal as a trick for a character or two, but every character, at the detriment to who they are as well? Just to sell a few more copies? Maybe I do have a different view of things, but I really don't think asking for characters, particularly female ones, to at least be designed in a realistic fashion in regards to body proportions, and in a way that ties in to who they are to be asking for too much. Then there's the story. (Some of it was pretty good, other aspects felt rather cringeworthy, and ends the franchise at a point where Mortal Kombat just does not feel like Mortal Kombat anymore. It went from a fantasy martial arts tournament where the fate of multiple realms were at stake to, well, I think it started out that way, but what in the world is it now? Even the attitude and general demeanor from all the new fans on the forums I used to hang out on has changed, and not for the better. Those aspects, and some others (cough Freddy Krueger cough) just got me aggitated to the point where I had to say goodbye after all these years.

And it is not going to change. The sales were magnificent, so this is what a majority of people want to see: uninspired character design, half-naked chicks beating themselves to a pulp and doing sexy dances at the end while covered in blood (I dunno, sex appeal while covered in blood never appealed to me, maybe I'm the odd one out there, then again, why people want polygonal sex in the first place is beyond me), stories that make little sense and alter an entire universe to the point that it is a vague shadow of what it used to be, and gameplay that, while better, is still buggy. And that is what companies go by: the bottom line. What the masses purchase. Corporations know two things sell well to the masses: sex and violence, but sex a little bit more. It was pretty apparent who they were targeting when promos and exclusives were being given to mens magazines in different countries of the world instead of, you know, gaming magazines and websites, before said magazines and websites would get them.

So yeah, there was my ragequit of the year.

Verm1s
11-01-2012, 19:29
I suppose you could say i boycott Mantic, but thats less out of any business practice they employ and more because everything they have produced so far is derivative, ugly crap.

I thought that was their overall business practise. :p

stroller
11-01-2012, 20:30
The nearest I get to rage is when I dropped Mantic. There was a time when their mailings became not so much pro-Mantic, as anti-GW. I said "Sod that for a game of soldiers (boom-TISH!) and pulled off the mailing list. As an aside, I saw my local independent gaming store was flogging off end of line warpath at 25% off last week (it wasn't selling). I took a good long hard look again, and thought - actually - even at that price, I still dont want it.

Ozorik
11-01-2012, 21:14
I thought that was their overall business practise. :p

You thinking of GW there :rolleyes:

If that thing which is all over the internet yet which can't be mentioned here is correct GW may have actually started making good rules again. I may actually want to actually play 40k again for the first time in over a decade.

lbecks
11-01-2012, 22:15
As a console player, DA 2 was not an improvement for console in any way whatsoever.

So you found DA1 too difficult on consoles? On the PC it was so fun. I loved the battle system.

Verm1s
11-01-2012, 23:23
You thinking of GW there :rolleyes:

Nope! GW isn't a game company that exists primarily to produce Mantic proxies. :)


If that thing which is all over the internet yet which can't be mentioned here is correct GW may have actually started making good rules again.

Ryan Giggs joined the GW studio...?

Ozorik
11-01-2012, 23:37
Nope! GW isn't a game company that exists primarily to produce Mantic proxies. :)


No, GW has a much wider range of things that it borrows from. Any other dead horses to flog?




Ryan Giggs joined the GW studio...?

Absolutely correct.

New Cult King
12-01-2012, 01:53
I've branched out into other gaming systems and other miniatures and terrain, but not out of pure rage. Most of the minis on my desk awaiting paint are GW, but they are now joined by Spartan Games, Privateer Press, Infinity, and some others.

lbecks
12-01-2012, 03:02
When battletech was bought by wizkids and turned into MW:Dark Age I went "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" I was a fan of the books and fiction and the whole time jump + simplified unit layouts made me cringe. But then that failed and battletech came back.

lurker1
12-01-2012, 04:11
Mine wasn't a rage quit. It was more like, lets spend this months gw allotment on warmachine and see how it goes. Got hooked from there.

Honestly I don't think I see myself ever rage quitting on a hobby like GW. I have done it on book series, board games, and even on some necessities like my internet provider (poor customer service), but not on something like GW. I've just sunk too much in it to walk away without being sure that the game I'm going to is a good one and won't just give me the same experiences. It's not like gw has high resale value (wierdly enough iv'e never sold a WM fig for less than 75% what I bought it for).

Satan
12-01-2012, 05:33
So you found DA1 too difficult on consoles? On the PC it was so fun. I loved the battle system.

...No? But people kept saying that DA 2 had been optimized for consoles. Which it hadn't. The combat was way superior to begin with in DA:O, and DA 2 was not an evolution of that system, rather it felt as if they hadn't even tried it on a console because I went button-mashing on X for 30 odd hours. It consisted of more button-mashing than say... Space Marine. It was a completely useless and non-immersive product in that regard and I fail to understand how they could not innovate combat whatsoever. Games which were at the time of release several years old were superior in this regard.

lbecks
12-01-2012, 05:50
...No? But people kept saying that DA 2 had been optimized for consoles. Which it hadn't. The combat was way superior to begin with in DA:O, and DA 2 was not an evolution of that system, rather it felt as if they hadn't even tried it on a console because I went button-mashing on X for 30 odd hours. It consisted of more button-mashing than say... Space Marine. It was a completely useless and non-immersive product in that regard and I fail to understand how they could not innovate combat whatsoever. Games which were at the time of release several years old were superior in this regard.

If you found DA1 just fine on consoles then you are in the same boat as PC gamers. DA2 was for people who found DA1 too hard on consoles, as i mentioned in my original post. People who kept stepping into their own spell range and found the tactics menu too complicated. Those horrible people.

infinite_array
12-01-2012, 06:10
I'm going to go with others here and say that my decision to stop playing (or at least actively collecting and owning) GW games wasn't a 'rage-quit' decision, but something that grew over time. I've got friends who still own GW armies, and I'm happy to game with them whenever they want to (even if they do believe that the Chaos Marine codex is completely OP :D).

My reasons developed over time, especially after I began discovering the much wider world of wargaming, thanks in large part to forums like Warseer and Dakka:
1. The fact that I am a wargamer, and not a Warhammer-er - and I should elaborate. I hope no one takes that as some sort of hobby snobbery. It means that I'd prefer to play a game that challenges me in tactical and strategic thinking, instead of just enjoying pushing my Space Marines around on a table and rolling some dice. If I can get a game where both are involved, so much the better. This led me to find other, more complex and less childish rulesets and universes. Plus, my preference for historical gaming didn't help, either - although I am quite sorry I didn't take the chance to grab at least one GW Historical book from their recent 50% off sale.
2. Prices. For example, I just put in an order to Maelstrom Games for some Perry Miniatures for my Black Powder Napoleonic British. I picked up 40 infantry models and 14 cavalry models (which will form 2 brigades in-and-of themselves, and are wonderfully detailed) for $50. Compare that to what you may get for $50 for, say, an Imperial Guard Army. Or, as a counter-balance, something from Privateer Press.
3. Business Practices. The change from metal (which I prefer) to Finecast, with an accompanying price hike. The idea that GW is 'the hobby' and that everything else is second rate. The southern-hemisphere embargo. Kirby stuffing his pockets every year thanks to the dividends GW keeps putting out. The release schedule, which encourages each new release to be the shiny-est and best-est, in order to keep sales going.

I could go on, but I'd rather not, especially since this is the first time in a while that I've participated in any sort of GW-bashing, something I'd hope to stop doing once I stopped purchasing their products and playing their games.

Lars Porsenna
12-01-2012, 18:00
When battletech was bought by wizkids and turned into MW:Dark Age I went "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" I was a fan of the books and fiction and the whole time jump + simplified unit layouts made me cringe. But then that failed and battletech came back.

To be accurate, battletech came back within a year of MWDA being launched, and existed side-by-side for most of MWDA's existence.

The flame wars were fun. As a long time battletech player (since 1985) I often found myself defening the DA timeline against the detractors, which frankly was no more disruptuve than the introducton of the Clans (that was the closest I came to a ragequit: I refused to play anything post 3025 for a decade after Clans were introduced; When Btech came back, I re-evaluated and am not so full of hate anymore...)

Damon.

Confessor_Atol
12-01-2012, 20:16
I quit 7th ed WFB in disgust after the Dark Elf and DoC books (I play DE).


I totally did the same thing. The new DOC book came out, and I swept two tournies with my mono nurgle list in 7th. I had to stop playing until 8th came out and they got a nerf......Then I got distracted by dwarves and ogres.

rmeister0
12-01-2012, 21:39
The only game I really quit out on was 40K in the debacle from 2nd edition to 3rd edition to 3rd edition with chapter approved and...I got tired of keeping up with it.

Other than that, it's mostly that games quit me:

1. WarZone. Now deceased. Never completed an army.
2. Chronopia. Now deceased. Nobody else has an army.
3. Void. Now deceased. Never completed an army.
4. Celtos. Now deceased, practically speaking. Saw the writing on the wall and didn't pursue it.
5. Confrontation. Now deceased.
6. AT-43. Now deceased.
7. Necromunda. Now deceased. Begging for multi-part plastic model kits like they made today.

I know I'm forgetting a few.

I'm getting back into the fray with Fantasy. Even better for me is the fact that, unlike 40K, the fantasy models have a wide variety of uses:

1. Song of Blades and Heroes
2. Ares
3. Mordheim
4. Warhammer
5. Warhammer Quest (to be pried from my cold dead fingers, you know)
6. Kings of War

And damn, but the printed materials are gorgeous and appeal to the collector in me.

Miyozaki
13-01-2012, 00:30
In regards to tabletop gaming, no. I'm super laid back, so it takes a lot to get me to the point I will leave something behind in a temper. I was a TCG player as a youngster and I am now moving into Miniatures gaming (hence my arrival on Warseer). The constant (****-poor excused) price increases with GW stuff has brought me close to not buying their stuff directly, but that is what the Internet is for.

For gaming; I came VERY close. Final Fantasy XIV... I uninstalled it, put the disc back in the box and it has been sat in my cupboard pretty much since it's release. I went back to FFXI, who have apparently borrowed their GOOD teams to the FFXIV team to bring it up to scratch. Maybe when the PS3 version is released...

lbecks
13-01-2012, 01:03
To be accurate, battletech came back within a year of MWDA being launched, and existed side-by-side for most of MWDA's existence.

The flame wars were fun. As a long time battletech player (since 1985) I often found myself defening the DA timeline against the detractors, which frankly was no more disruptuve than the introducton of the Clans (that was the closest I came to a ragequit: I refused to play anything post 3025 for a decade after Clans were introduced; When Btech came back, I re-evaluated and am not so full of hate anymore...)

Damon.

I got into battletech from the mechwarrior video games, so I like the clans . . . and despise victor "the midget" steiner davion!

Lars Porsenna
13-01-2012, 03:42
I got into battletech from the mechwarrior video games, so I like the clans . . . and despise victor "the midget" steiner davion!

Victor wasn't such a bad guy...maybe a bit naive, but I never held a grudge against him.

Anyone from the Cappelan Confederation though...hate those guys!

Damon.

Bloodknight
13-01-2012, 10:19
Heh, on Megameknet I'm currently the Chancellor of the CC :p.

It's always been my favorite faction. If you read the new house book, they're a lot more likeable. Sure, they have the servitor class, but anybody gets 2 chances to not land in there, it's not hereditary and life for the common Capellan is good enough to inspire fierce loyalty. Also, they have the best IS mechwarriors, they're just plagued by their size-related weak economy compared to the other big houses.

That said (pic found on photobucket, credits to whoever made it):

Castiel
13-01-2012, 13:20
I haven't really quit on a game but I have quit on a company. I refuse now to buy any miniature game from Mongoose Publishing after their handling of both Starship Troopers and the Babylon 5 Call to Arms.

They dropped ACTA with the excuse they were pulling out of miniatures to concentrate on producing high quality books (I'm sure one or two people will recall the first print copies of Elric and Hawkmoon - the only word associated with the quality of them was 'poor').

With SST they promised to create a universal set of rules for use with Battlefield: Evolution and SST, they even said they would post the rules after dropping minis so that people could still use existing figures then everything dried up - nothing.

I have been tempted by the new Star Trek version of ACTA but remember their previous form so am no longer prepared to put money into something they will probably pull the plug on in 3-5 years time.

Bloodknight
13-01-2012, 13:34
Is Mongoose even still alive? I only ever hear about flops from them and failed game systems/failed support for their systems.

Lars Porsenna
13-01-2012, 14:32
Is Mongoose even still alive? I only ever hear about flops from them and failed game systems/failed support for their systems.

Yes, they are quite alive. I have been buying and collecting The Noble Armada rules and ships (I am a HUGE Fading Suns fan), and looking forward to when they start distributing the 3e rules for the RPG.

Re: Bab5, I seem to recall their "excuse" was that the IP holder was asking more money than Mongoose thought it was worth to renew their agreement? That's what I seem to remember from all of that...

Damon.

PS: To bloodknight -- still hate them! I'm a Steiner loyalist!

AndrewGPaul
13-01-2012, 14:59
Re: Bab5, I seem to recall their "excuse" was that the IP holder was asking more money than Mongoose thought it was worth to renew their agreement? That's what I seem to remember from all of that...

Not a million miles away from the reason Agents of Gaming shut up shop, so I'm inclined to believe them.

Rogue
13-01-2012, 15:44
It would appear that the sentiment on this thread is not specifically "rage" switching or quitting, but changing over time when you see the writing on the wall. I am in the same boat with WFB now-a-days. It is more of a forlorn feeling rather than a rage issue with me. I miss the game, but I refuse to play a game system that I dont like. I am actively looking at other systems out there to find something that appeals to me.

What has lead me to stop playing WFB are the rules, and the models that GW is bringing out that does not appeal to me. I have a well detailed explaniation on my blog, linked in my sig, as to what I really dont like about the rules. Lets just say that I have trouble wraping my mind around the rules so that they make sense to me in my version of the fantasy world. If there were miniatures that appeal to me from the GW line now a days, I would proabably still be interested in buying them, which is no longer the case. Finecast does not come into the picture, mainly because the models dont past muster with me to begin with regardless of the material used.

I am starting 40K(well actually started a few years ago, but more involved now than before perhaps), so I am still going to be a customer of GW from time to time. However, I am trying to take some of my lessons of the past with WFB. Which is basically work on one army at a time, and dont settle for the new shiny fig just because it is a new shiny fig.

Llew
13-01-2012, 15:59
Rage quit on a company? Nope. But stopped buying due to gradually-increasing dissatisfaction and a realization that it wasn't going to improve? Sure.

There's an amazingly rich world of games out right now. One could argue that there has never been a better time to be a gamer.

The Devourer
13-01-2012, 17:32
Rage quit on a company? Nope. But stopped buying due to gradually-increasing dissatisfaction and a realization that it wasn't going to improve? Sure.

Same for me. There was never a moment i angrily stormed away from GW, I just slowly realised that I didn't like their buisness practicess and the realisation that there were companies able to give me everything I look for in a wargame.

Reinholt
13-01-2012, 19:54
I'm with others in this thread; my decisions tend to be rather measured and deliberate, and I've never rage-quit a game. I do drift with my preferences though.

I still play 40k. I don't play Fantasy at all. I still play Gothic. I still play LotR/WotR. I still play Blood Bowl.

I haven't bought more than $50 direct from GW in the past six months, if that. Mainly in the form of paints. Right now my efforts either go towards purchasing GW products off the secondary market, or other games.

So rage quit? No. Denial of money until they stop behaving like fools? Yes.

Commissar_Kahl
13-01-2012, 20:40
The closest I came to a rage quit was the switch from 2nd ed. to 3rd ed. 40K.

A lot of my friends quit D&D with 4th edition. They hated the tabletop miniature style combat focus. being a role player and a miniatures gamer it has appealed to me.

Kaptajn_Congoboy
13-01-2012, 23:22
I think the people I know who have rage quit any miniatures game can be counted on two fingers (for, in both cases, what I saw as idiotic reasons). I do, however, know lots of people who have quit games in a slow and deliberate manner, as the majority of people here seem to view their changes of systems.

susu.exp
14-01-2012, 00:55
It's always been my favorite faction. If you read the new house book, they're a lot more likeable.

They were rather likeable in the old house book as well. Compared to most houses theyīve been a rather stable and free system - until Max and Romano got into power. The book timeline was somewhat unfortunate for them, starting when they were at their worst. Sun Tzu has to take the spot as the best politician of the IS, with his aunt the only real contender.

Um, back to the main topic:
Nope, I donīt think Iīve ever done this or ever would do this. I stop playing games if I canīt get a good time from them. And if I do I donīt switch to another system to spite the old one - I will (and do) play various systems because I like them. And thatīs something I still find weird about some game systems - they arenīt advertized on their own merit, but just as "not GW". Thatīs neither a good reason to start a game, nor really a reason at all...

Nephilim of Sin
16-01-2012, 05:28
I raged-quit Magic: The Gathering.

It was just before Urza's block was set to be released. Everything had been confirmed, and shortly before they pre-release, they began to ban cards that hadn't even come out yet. Sure, if you happened to open the card up in a pack, you could send it off for another pack, but, the hassle involved, and the chance you could still get one of those cards, did not make it worth it. That, combined with the excessive bannings that were going on in those days made me lose faith.

Oh course, I finally rejoined during the Zendikar Block, and I loved it. The game was fun again (for me), and they hadn't banned a card in years.

Then they ban Jace and Stoneforge.....

Still, I haven't given up, although I have completely given up on the Modern format. I understand it is new, but, given M:TG's long history, you'd think they would have been able to realize the problems. Even still, they aren't even taking care of the core issues that make some of these cards 'banworthy', aside from Valakut (itself being banned). Instead of getting rid of a few problems, they see a deck that is running rampant, and get rid of the cards that help it run rampant, but not the key card that is causing all the trouble in the first place.

Dragon Age: Origins is another one that almost got me. Were it not for Mass Effect, I would have given up on Bioware after they made their 'throw everything we have ever done into one game so we can try and make a Pen and Paper RPG'. I played that game until the end, doing all alternatives, and the whole time I was just waiting, thinking 'maybe I will like this'. The Fade was enough that I should have rage-quit (I played as a Dwarf. I did not realize this completely screwed you), but luckily, I knew enough not to play the second one.

New Cult King
16-01-2012, 06:01
The closest I came to a rage quit was the switch from 2nd ed. to 3rd ed. 40K.

A lot of my friends quit D&D with 4th edition. They hated the tabletop miniature style combat focus. being a role player and a miniatures gamer it has appealed to me.

Actually, this reminds me - I almost ragequit D&D after I bought all the 3rd Ed books, only for them to release 3.5 almost immediately after.

I ran an eye over the PHB for 4th Ed., laughed, and put it back on the shelf :D

Dyrnwyn
16-01-2012, 06:16
Eh. I've the closest I've come to 'rage-quitting' was GW's main systems, last May. I already hadn't purchased anything new in 6 months, and hadn't played a game in 10 or 11. I'd already decided to bow out of Fantasy as 8e completely changed the feel of my army for the worse. I wasn't having fun at all in 5e 40k, and was sticking to Mordheim, Necromunda and other side games. Then we got the antipode embargo, Failcast announcement, and price hikes all at once. I looked at where the game was, looked at what the company was doing, and said to myself 'That's it. I'm done now.'

I still have both my 40k armies - my Orks get used in Gorkamorka and in a local hombrew skirmish game. My Grey Knights are now knight figures for D&D. I still have my Wood Elves, they get used in D&D and Mordhiem. I continue to play the underrepresented Specialist Games, but I'm done with GW's main systems until they get their ducks in a row.

Regarding the side-discussion of Dragon Age - in a reversal of what everyone has said - I liked DA2 more than DA1. This is probably because I found every single battle tremendously boring, and the long arcs to resolve some quest strings just caused my to completely lose interest. If I had kept playing, I might have found DA1's story and world building to be far superior to DA2, but I never even finished the game because of combats that alternated between frustrating and boring. I like DA2's arcade style combat. DA2's overall story is interesting, but it gets a bit repetitive having every rogue mage be a blood mage, and every mage you meet try to kill you is terribly predictable. From what I hear, DA1's story is fantastic. I wish I could enjoy it. DA2 is nice in that it's pretty clear what the tone of your response is going to be, rather than text which could be sarcastic or sincere.

Completely agreed on Skyrim though - I'm loving every moment of it.

MOMUS
16-01-2012, 07:37
I switched from 40k to fantasy in the summer, having played 40k alot i got a bit burnt out. A new edition of fantasy and cheap liazrdmen from ebay was an easy excuse to start 8th ed.


I am in the same boat with WFB now-a-days. It is more of a forlorn feeling rather than a rage issue with me. I miss the game, but I refuse to play a game system that I dont like. I am actively looking at other systems out there to find something that appeals to me.

What has lead me to stop playing WFB are the rules, and the models that GW is bringing out that does not appeal to me. I have a well detailed explaniation on my blog, linked in my sig, as to what I really dont like about the rules. Lets just say that I have trouble wraping my mind around the rules so that they make sense to me in my version of the fantasy world. If there were miniatures that appeal to me from the GW line now a days, I would proabably still be interested in buying them, which is no longer the case. Finecast does not come into the picture, mainly because the models dont past muster with me to begin with regardless of the material used.

I am starting 40K, so I am still going to be a customer of GW from time to time. However, I am trying to take some of my lessons of the past with WFB. Which is basically work on one army at a time, and dont settle for the new shiny fig just because it is a new shiny fig.

Rogue, your argument dosnt really make sense...You switched from fantasy because you dont like the models? When they are making some of the best multi part plastic kits and making more of them then ever?
I went to the blog in your sig but it read like you havent actually played 8th.

I would say it looks like you might be dissapointed again, joining 40k just before the game systems about to change significantly.

AndrewGPaul
16-01-2012, 08:33
Actually, this reminds me - I almost ragequit D&D after I bought all the 3rd Ed books, only for them to release 3.5 almost immediately after.

See, that's why I said it " seems a bit childish, really". If you had done that, who do you think would have suffered the greatest loss? WotC, who would have ost one customer, or you, who would have wasted all that money on books? You had the 3rd ed books, so 3.5 was an irrelevance. It's like quitting D&D because they released the Star Wars RPG. :)

If you don't like the products a company puts out, then refusing to buy them is fair enough. However, ceasing to play a game you enjoy because they've released a new edition you don't like is stupid.

AndrewGPaul
16-01-2012, 08:43
It would appear that the sentiment on this thread is not specifically "rage" switching or quitting, but changing over time when you see the writing on the wall. I am in the same boat with WFB now-a-days. It is more of a forlorn feeling rather than a rage issue with me. I miss the game, but I refuse to play a game system that I dont like.

So why not play the edition of Warhammer that you and your fellow players do like?


Rogue, your argument dosnt really make sense...You switched from fantasy because you dont like the models? When they are making some of the best multi part plastic kits and making more of them then ever?

It's quite a simple argument, so I don't know what it is that's confusing you. The new armies have quite a distinctive style, and it's really not difficult to unerstand that people may not like that style. It's got nothing to do with the technical quality of the miniatures, the number of options on the sprues, etc. Personally, I really like the new "set piece" kits for recent armies - the goblin spider, the Tomb Kings Sphinx, the new floating things for the Vampire Counts, etc, but even if I played one of those armies, I seriously doubt I'd use them in a game - they're a bit too big and unwieldy for that.

New Cult King
16-01-2012, 08:49
See, that's why I said it " seems a bit childish, really". If you had done that, who do you think would have suffered the greatest loss? WotC, who would have ost one customer, or you, who would have wasted all that money on books? You had the 3rd ed books, so 3.5 was an irrelevance. It's like quitting D&D because they released the Star Wars RPG. :)

If you don't like the products a company puts out, then refusing to buy them is fair enough. However, ceasing to play a game you enjoy because they've released a new edition you don't like is stupid.

It was the principle of it. 3.5 was released around 3 years after 3rd Ed. It was a massively blatant money rip, and the issues could have been fixed with errata. I just felt ripped off, and disillusioned with the company. I couldn't just keep playing straight 3rd, because all source books released after that point were done as 3.5, including the third party books. Even GW doesn't pump out editions that quickly.

But I stayed with it, and managed to meld the two versions together in a workable format, but I started playing White Wolf's WoD system around 2003, and slowly drifted from D&D - I just didn't want to support Wizards anymore, and with the release of 4th? Well, I haven't bought a new D&D book since I can remember, and I won't be again.

AndrewGPaul
16-01-2012, 09:09
I couldn't just keep playing straight 3rd, because all source books released after that point were done as 3.5, including the third party books.

Sure you could. You'd manage fine with the books released up until that point, hadn't you? :)

My view is, it's fair enough to stop buying stuff - whether it's simply because they're not making anything you want, or because you disagree with company policies - but throwing away all the stuff you've already bought only hurts you, not the company.

New Cult King
16-01-2012, 09:13
Maybe my definition of ragequit is a bit different. I wasn't going to throw away my books. I just was angry enough that I didn't want to buy any more books, or play D&D any more. I have a huge collection of rpg books that I've bought over the years, and never played. I love the artwork and "fluff".

Considering that in the first 3 years of 3rd there was only a relatively small selection of books to choose from (I say relatively, because even those few at AU$70-ish each were very expensive for me at the time), and that all the cool future releases (specifically stuff to do with my fave class, the Necromancer) were in 3.5... This is why I wanted to quit playing, out of anger - hence, in my terminology - ragequit.

simonr1978
16-01-2012, 09:41
I'd say the nearest thing I've done to this was way back during the change over from Rogue Trader to 2nd Edition. GW released a couple of shiny new books for Rogue Trader including a whole new vehicle combat system only to completely invalidate them within, if memory serves me right, much less than six months (It might have been as little as only a few months) by releasing a whole new edition.

It seemed a rather cynical cash grab to me so although I hadn't lost out personally (I was saving up to buy them when they went OOP and 2nd Edition was released) I made the decision not to get the new edition and stick to playing RT with what books I had and much of my GW spending got curtailed anyway as I discovered Battletech and found I preferred to spend my money on mechs rather than Marines.

Then, much later on the Battletech story arc got all screwy with the Word of Blake Jihad and Darkage stuff, but at that point I just mentally shrugged my shoulders and decided it was easy enough for me that in my own Battletech universe certain events just wouldn't happen.

Ultimately if I can still enjoy something I'm not going to completely throw the dummy out of the pram and quit playing it altogether, although like others I might well drift away from that system or company and either stop spending on new products or at least spend less on it.

Bob5000
16-01-2012, 13:28
Possible candidate for Rage Quit was due to the shock I experienced at being told a game I then currently played would cost me Ģ45 to update -- WHFB 8th ed rulebook , that was the final straw and two of my three Fantasy Armies were E-Bayed as a result .
What saved my final army was a generous donation of a spare starter box rulebook - however , still havent played 8th Ed .

Not sure what is going to happen with 6th Ed 40K - I occasionally buy a Codex and a model box to update , but a similar experience with the rulebook may just tip me over again

AndrewGPaul
16-01-2012, 13:44
Maybe my definition of ragequit is a bit different. I wasn't going to throw away my books. I just was angry enough that I didn't want to buy any more books, or play D&D any more.

To me, that's the same thing. :) Whether you throw the books away or simply stop playing the game, the end result is the same.

As for edition changes, why does everyone fall for it? I've seen threads where people have complained that their entire group hates 8th edition WFB, or 5th edition 40K, or 4th edition D&D, or WAB 2nd edition or WRG 7th edition or whatever. In that case, why not go back to the previous edition? Or even better, leave off buying the new version until you've seen what it's like?

MOMUS
16-01-2012, 14:17
It's quite a simple argument, so I don't know what it is that's confusing you. The new armies have quite a distinctive style, and it's really not difficult to unerstand that people may not like that style. It's got nothing to do with the technical quality of the miniatures, the number of options on the sprues, etc.

He said the miniatures don't appeal to him, which i find confusing as they are some of the best GW has made. I hate the prices and mainly buy from ebay but i cant deny the quality, i wondered what he dosnt like about the new stuff or what he prefered about the older GW models.

He also states that the rules are why he dosn't play and that he has a 'well detailed explaniation on my blog, linked in my sig'.
I looked at the blog but found a four point explanation and some of his points aren't even true. :confused:

simonr1978
16-01-2012, 14:35
I don't think it's so much "falling for it" as many people like to be current and as far as possible official, plus in any game system it's usually much easier to get opponents if you're playing the current edition. Of course you can play any edition you want or combination of them, the same way you can play any houserule you want or even homebrew your own rules altogether. But it's easier to get a pick up game if you're playing the current edition directly from the rulebook.

In my case at least it wasn't that a new edition was being released that bothered me so much, it was that these two books were released for RT at a time when GW themselves must have had a release date for 2nd Edition on the calender and must have known that they'd have very short shelf life and be effectively useless in the new edition (Unless you needed something to stick under one corner of a wonky gaming table that is). It seemed unfair to those that bought them and that very nearly included myself.

Lars Porsenna
16-01-2012, 14:36
As for edition changes, why does everyone fall for it? I've seen threads where people have complained that their entire group hates 8th edition WFB, or 5th edition 40K, or 4th edition D&D, or WAB 2nd edition or WRG 7th edition or whatever. In that case, why not go back to the previous edition? Or even better, leave off buying the new version until you've seen what it's like?

While it is true you can continue to play the version you prefer, there ARE good reasons to upgrade nonetheless. A big one IMO is recruitment. It is much, much easier to recruit new players if you're playing the latest version of the game than it is if you're playing an OOP version that perhaps the newest supplements or army books might not be compatable with. For an established and stable group, this might be less important, but one thing I found as an adult gamer is that players drift in and out of the game as interest and life get in the way, so that there is always the specter of the need to recruit new players in order to keep the core group going.

Damon.

Galfinnan
16-01-2012, 15:09
I know how you feel about the AD&D siutation, when we started playing we invested heavily in second edition books, we have a vast collection and even went back and bought a chunk of 1st edition stuff. The actual cost of the stuff we have aquired over the years must be substantial. When 3rd edition came out we more or less ignored it for this reason and kept playing our home-brew version of 1st/2nd and have been the same ever since. Our version is stream-lined with enough rules to keep things in line but without worrying about the minute details. True indeed the possibility of creating a Drizzzz replica is substantially diminished but its a price I'm willing to pay. From what I have heard the newer versions seemed to make the individual characters more and more overpowered to the point of riduclousness. Our groups characters all died recently, which means we will all be starting from first level, its much more enjoyable as you everything you achieve your character has worked for and the stakes are a lot higher. Essentially, what I am saying is that the effect of the creeping increases in power of characters, armies etc is a purposeful one on the part of the manufacturer and you can either buy into it and get the latest version or choose to ignore it and carry on regardless. As long as your group all agree either action should be fine.

Etienne de Beaugard
16-01-2012, 15:19
As for edition changes, why does everyone fall for it?

For RPGs, I completely agree with you. RPGs require small, long term groups, that play cooperatively. As long as everyone in the group agrees to a certain rules set, that set can be used indefinitely.

Table-Top Miniatures Wargames often have a different dynamic. For many players, the pick-up game at the FLGS or the club/convention tournament is the norm. In these environments, the current edition is usually the default rules set. While a group of players can (and do) decide to stick with a past rules set, this has not been the norm in my experience.

AndrewGPaul
16-01-2012, 15:55
He said the miniatures don't appeal to him, which i find confusing as they are some of the best GW has made.

You like the new miniatures, he doesn't. It's really not difficult to understand. :)

paddyalexander
16-01-2012, 17:09
The only time I ever actualy rage quit a game was Wrestlemania 2000 on the N64. The game was very enjoyable most of the time and I became skilled enough at playing it so that I could counter a counter move. Except that durring the single player campaign mode your opponents would be randomly embued with all of the powers of internet Chuck Norris. You can't touch them without them countering you. If you pull off a counter to that you still get countered, even for basic punches let alone grapples.

The only way I found you could beat them was to very slowly ware them down by jumping out of the ring and pulling them trough the ropes to the floor when they approuched to climb trough. Rinse & repeat untill they are worn down enough for some actual moves to be pulled off. Not fun.

What had caused me to rage quit was that I had managed to play trough to the final match in the story mode as champion, something I had never managed before. The final match was a cage match against one off these unstoppable opponents. Because of the cage you couldn't use the rope trick so there was literly nothing I could do to win & I did try multiple times before giving up in angry frustration.

Rogue
16-01-2012, 17:17
Rogue, your argument dosnt really make sense...You switched from fantasy because you dont like the models?

No, I quit playing WFB because I dont like the rules of WFB. I stopped buying the miniatures from GW because I dont like the look of them. I would be happy to buy the models and play them in another system if I still liked them.


When they are making some of the best multi part plastic kits and making more of them then ever?

You missed the part about how that is your opinion, and that is perfectly fine that you like the models, I don't. I am just not impressed with what what they are coming out with. None of the new models that have come out with the 8th edition have given me the "must buy" impulse.


I went to the blog in your sig but it read like you havent actually played 8th.

I played enough to know that I dont like the rules. I don't need to play any more games to know that the core rules are not my cup of tea.


I would say it looks like you might be dissapointed again, joining 40k just before the game systems about to change significantly.

I suppose you may be right on this, however I did not just start 40k in the past few months, but rather two years back. I will make sure that I edit that.

Rogue
16-01-2012, 17:22
So why not play the edition of Warhammer that you and your fellow players do like?


Great minds think alike. I am ever trying to find people who do want to play a previous edition of WFB, more specifically the 6th edition since that is my personal favorite.

MOMUS
16-01-2012, 18:12
You like the new miniatures, he doesn't. It's really not difficult to understand. :)

You misquoted me :) i also said:

.. i wondered what he dosn't like about the new stuff or what he prefered about the older GW models.


No, I quit playing WFB because I dont like the rules of WFB. I stopped buying the miniatures from GW because I dont like the look of them. I would be happy to buy the models and play them in another system if I still liked them.
You missed the part about how that is your opinion, and that is perfectly fine that you like the models, I don't. I am just not impressed with what what they are coming out with. None of the new models that have come out with the 8th edition have given me the "must buy" impulse.

Sorry i just mentioned the models as you said, 'and the models that GW is bringing out that does not appeal to me'
I just wondered which ones and what it was aboutolder ranges you liked more, i could agree with you on say daemonettes but i think for the most part the plastics have got better. Is it you liked the multi-pose regiments?



I played enough to know that I dont like the rules. I don't need to play any more games to know that the core rules are not my cup of tea.

I suspect we may have to agree to disagree, but some of the things you list about not liking are misunderstandings on your part. For example:

'An extra attack on the charge makes no real sense to me at all, one of the 40K rules that dont translate well. It seems to me that most of the new rules in close combat that are new were to compensate for very hard elite units of the 7th edition. This phase is what really sent me over the edge.'

Wouldnt want you to short change yourself.

Nephilim of Sin
16-01-2012, 18:24
True indeed the possibility of creating a Drizzzz replica is substantially diminished but its a price I'm willing to pay. From what I have heard the newer versions seemed to make the individual characters more and more overpowered to the point of riduclousness.

if you ever venture onto TVTropes, you will eventually see a comment on the Gamebreaking page (I believe), about a Kobold first-level god, essentially, that completely destroys the game for 3.5.

I was always of the mindset that 2nd and below were amazing for players (Player's Option books, Dragon Magazine articles, etc...), while 3rd and 3.5 made the DM's life a LOT easier. Thus, I have a mis-mash of '2.5' I play, as I use some of the DM sourcebooks, but convert them over to 2nd Edition. At least, the best I can.

Don't get me wrong, you can make a powerful character with Skills and Powers (my preferred system), and some of the Kits were broken, but not like 3.5. At all.


Sure you could. You'd manage fine with the books released up until that point, hadn't you? :)


Etienne kinda touched on this, but I disagree slightly.

You have to have a group that plays. 3rd Edition D&D would probably be similar to 6th Edition Warhammer. Not only was it a HUGE change, but it also saw the influx of a lot of players. Many of these players became the new fanbase, and it was usually these player's that one would find to play with.

Groups don't last forever, as sad as it is. It is true that you can organize a group, and some DMs have campaigns that run for decades+, but that is really rare. For the same reason that people quit Warhammer (life, family, marriage, funds, etc...), many quit D&D, and that is not even counting the essential people in your group that simply had to move.

That is only one issue, though. To finish that issue, I will say that, in order to find replacements for your group (or to find a brand-new group if you moved), it is extremely hard to find those that will play the older edition.

Also, saying 'You've done fine with those books up until then' (paraphrased) doesn't really work, at all. Essentially, that would be me saying to you 'You don't need another army, you've done fine with O&Gs (if you play them) so far'. And that is *IF* you actually keep the group that you are playing with. Why?

You can only do so much. You can only put new twists on old things, homebrew rules, etc... for so long. That is the reason why Dragon Magazine (and Dungeons, to an extent) were even somewhat popular; they gave you new ideas to introduce, or made the older sourcebooks more viable. Once they make a switch to another edition, yes, I can still read Dragon Magazine, but if I see something in there, I have to basically reverse-engineer it to get it to work. From a player's standpoint, that might be that hard. But, I DM, so, it takes a *ton* of work.

Even worse is when they simply 'reference' something that seems amazing, but then in order to actually understand what they mean, or to make the idea reach fruition, you have to go out and buy the sourcebook. Which wouldn't be so bad, except again, you have to complete rig it to fit your playing style.

So yeah, I can see why someone could ragequit when they spend a grand on a new edition, only to have it invalidated (even slightly) just a small time later. It doesn't make what you have useless, but it means that you won't be buying any more product from the company unless you have time on your hands. And it also means that you have to find a group that now plays the old edition, which can be harder than it seems (of course, this depends on your area).

Dyrnwyn
16-01-2012, 19:16
As for edition changes, why does everyone fall for it? I've seen threads where people have complained that their entire group hates 8th edition WFB, or 5th edition 40K, or 4th edition D&D, or WAB 2nd edition or WRG 7th edition or whatever. In that case, why not go back to the previous edition? Or even better, leave off buying the new version until you've seen what it's like?

RPG's have a different dynamic than wargames, especially GW's wargames. With an RPG, so long as one person owns the core books, it's easy to keep playing an older edition If one person has a large collection, that works just fine, since you have a small group gaming in one location, and you all have to agree on a game to play anyway. Wargames CAN do the same thing if you keep things to a small group, but generally require a rulebook or two for each player. With wargames, pickup games are pretty common, and restricting yourself to a ruleset that is one or two editions old prevents you from getting pickup games from anyone who isn't in your group.

Just look at the D&D scene compared to Warhammer though - edition wars are still debated - years after 4e came out, I still see 2e v. 3e v. 4e arguments. The small group nature and the fact that you only need one set of books to play keeps older editions of RPG's alive. The wider community is there to provide homebrew rules, discuss rules and relate stories, but they aren't people you're likely to ever game with. Wargames on the other hand are based in a wide community where ever other person in it is a potential opponent - shared rules systems allow you to even play across language barriers (Not that I have done so myself, but I have heard others do so). The 'shared rules system' is important there. People update to the new rules because it becomes the new standard, and you can stay with your old edition, but it will become increasingly hard to find new opponents as time goes by, and pickup games may become impossible.

New Cult King
16-01-2012, 20:44
You can only do so much. You can only put new twists on old things, homebrew rules, etc... for so long. That is the reason why Dragon Magazine (and Dungeons, to an extent) were even somewhat popular; they gave you new ideas to introduce, or made the older sourcebooks more viable. Once they make a switch to another edition, yes, I can still read Dragon Magazine, but if I see something in there, I have to basically reverse-engineer it to get it to work. From a player's standpoint, that might be that hard. But, I DM, so, it takes a *ton* of work.

Even worse is when they simply 'reference' something that seems amazing, but then in order to actually understand what they mean, or to make the idea reach fruition, you have to go out and buy the sourcebook. Which wouldn't be so bad, except again, you have to complete rig it to fit your playing style.

So yeah, I can see why someone could ragequit when they spend a grand on a new edition, only to have it invalidated (even slightly) just a small time later. It doesn't make what you have useless, but it means that you won't be buying any more product from the company unless you have time on your hands. And it also means that you have to find a group that now plays the old edition, which can be harder than it seems (of course, this depends on your area).

This pretty much sums it up for me. Sure, I was doing fine with the three core books, but what happened when I wanted to branch out, maybe to a new Forgotten Realms campaign (oops! 3.5!) or any of the other new source books?

I know that comparing D&D 3rd Ed's shift to 3.5 is not the same as say WHFB 7th Ed to 8th - the thing is, D&D 3.5 wasn't an entirely new edition. Like I said earlier, it was a cash grab that could have been easily fixed with an errata pamphlet. It was very much the same game, but with enough niggly little differences that it required players and DMs to buy new books all over again just to keep playing.

I can understand the shift to 4th Ed (7 years later, mind you, more than twice the time between 3 and 3.5) requiring all new books. It's just that annoying little skip from 3 to 3.5 that threw me and my patchy group of players off the game.

Regardless, it's clear that some people would be happy playing an RPG system with the 3 core books and nothing else, and that's cool. For me and my group though, that wasn't enough. ESPECIALLY since we had just "upgraded" from the library of AD&D books we already had, and invested in this new system that was rendered obsolete way too quickly.

Etienne de Beaugard
17-01-2012, 02:26
This pretty much sums it up for me. Sure, I was doing fine with the three core books, but what happened when I wanted to branch out, maybe to a new Forgotten Realms campaign (oops! 3.5!) or any of the other new source books?

I can understand your frustration.

I actually took a much different approach. After college (mumbledy-mumble) years ago, I was separated from my gaming groups and was not in a position to seek out a new group. After several years of maintaining my collection of books and watching the games I play expand, contract, change companies and re-edition, I came to a realization. Simple, complete core rules are often times better than games with massive resources and expansions.

The edition of D&D I prefer to play is the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia. This 304 page gem has everything I need to run a campaign. While old and simple, the rules are clear, concise and complete. It can take some players a bit to get used to using only archetypal characters, but most end up having a lot of fun. Get the rules out of the way and let the story unfold.

AndrewGPaul
17-01-2012, 08:54
That was pretty much my thought. All you really need are a Players Handbook and a GM's handbook, and maybe a Monster Manual. The rest of it is marketing. :)

Galfinnan
17-01-2012, 11:16
I agree Etienne, really in RPG the rules should be a lot less visible and the story should shine through more than anything. Our DM has been doing it for 20 years, has his own campaign world that is more real and more vivid to us than anything that was ever available for sale. I would say he is the reason most of still play because he is so skilled and can blend several storylines simultaneously.

We tried the player options books and I thought they were pretty good, it gave the characters a new dimension and and while it added a fair amount to the process of character creation once this had been done there wasn't that much addittional work involved. Using them i created a halfing sharp-shooter, was great fun making called shots against spellcasters, smashing enemy potion bottles etc. Thinking about it now I'm not entirely aure why we don't use them now.

New Cult King
17-01-2012, 20:54
Currently, my most regular gaming group never looks at a rulebook. Our games are stories, and the ebb and flow of the story is affected by the characters and Storyteller, but rarely by the rules. Sometimes we can go three or four sessions in a row without rolling a single die.

However, at the time, I was 20-ish, as were the rest of the D&D group, and there were a few power players involved, so rules were very important. The number of arguments that broke out over even something as simple as a +1 or -1 to a dice roll... :rolleyes:

So sure Andrew, you may be able to do fine with just the basic books, but for me and my group at that particular time, that was not good enough.

Nephilim of Sin
17-01-2012, 22:09
I can understand your frustration.

The edition of D&D I prefer to play is the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia. This 304 page gem has everything I need to run a campaign. While old and simple, the rules are clear, concise and complete. It can take some players a bit to get used to using only archetypal characters, but most end up having a lot of fun. Get the rules out of the way and let the story unfold.

I was going a different route with this initially, but, I changed my mind. The Rules Cyclopedia isn't bad, at all, but (maybe something I will touch on in my next post), the key thing is what you already mentioned (well, one key thing); you have to find a group that wants to use it, which admittingly is a problem that I have with 2nd Edition. The other issue?

Like you said, you have experience previously. I have many books I haven't touched in a long time, simply because I really don't need to anymore. Unless I forget something...:(


That was pretty much my thought. All you really need are a Players Handbook and a GM's handbook, and maybe a Monster Manual. The rest of it is marketing. :)

Well, you need a group, too, but that is just me being pedantic :p. I completely disagree. You, maybe. Maybe that will work. Me? I have never been to Europe. I have never been inside a castle. I could make an epic campaign set in the far-flung medieval <insert big US city>, but, that kinda doesn't really fit the mood.

I have been playing for years, and I have amassed a collection of great AD&D books that I use for reference. There are even more that I wish to add, simply because I desire to add new knowledge and breath some life into my stale ideas (at times). However, perhaps it is due to the way I learn or digest information, some things may not gel, some things may not be visualized, etc... I strive for a sense of 'realism' (yeah, I know, but I hope people get what I mean ;)) in my campaign. Without these books, I might not be able to achieve that.

'But wait, there is the internet!'. Well, yes. But that is the point. I, and many others, still need something beyond the core 'trinity'. Old groups didn't have the internet; they went to their library, or they were in college (often field specific), or etc..., but whatever they were doing, they were researching on their own. Campaigns became interesting because people *did* some research to find out what a Castle is really like, instead of throwing 100 Orcs into a 10x10 room that doesn't even fit into a Castle's 'mold'.

So, they produced books. Some were adventures to aid the fledgling product, some sourcebooks for helping those, like myself, that have trouble visualizing what a 'proper' castle should look like. It helps. Don't get me wrong, I would love to make use of the Stronghold Builder's Guide, but, I don't do 3rd edition (or maybe it is 3.5). Instead, I have the old, blue, 'Castle Builder's Guide' or some such. Does it help? Yes. Is it great? Oh god no, it is horribly laid out, lacks proper visualizations (again, key for me), and forces me to do more research. BUT... it was a good starting point, and it, along with Dragon Magazine articles for that edition, have helped me tremendously.

I haven't even touched upon bringing in experienced players, players with multiple books (bad players! DM EYES ONLY!!!), players from different editions, etc.... I will agree; many books are 'cash grabs' and 'marketing techniques' (which I believe is what NCK was referring to). Then again, I never played Greyhawk, never want to, and I could see that as being the same thing. Regardless, though, I guess I would say you need the holy Trinity of books AND experience; through whatever means, that is up to the person that uses them. For me? It is supplements, and the net.


I agree Etienne, really in RPG the rules should be a lot less visible and the story should shine through more than anything. Our DM has been doing it for 20 years, has his own campaign world that is more real and more vivid to us than anything that was ever available for sale. I would say he is the reason most of still play because he is so skilled and can blend several storylines simultaneously.

I personally use the rules as a guideline/frame, and then once I have a good understanding, I expand upon that. Currently, I have about 250 pages of a 'Player's Handbook' done for my PCs that doesn't even have normal AD&D rules in it (and sadly, another 200 pages on just religion/priests... I write a lot...:(); it just relates to my own home-brewed campaign world. Of course, some of that is taken from additional supplements in pieces.

It might not sound like it, but I am actually agreeing with you. The rules need to be in place to frame the story; the story should be engaging enough to where the rules aren't side-lined, but there as a frame of reference. Kudos to your DM.



We tried the player options books and I thought they were pretty good, it gave the characters a new dimension and and while it added a fair amount to the process of character creation once this had been done there wasn't that much addittional work involved. Using them i created a halfing sharp-shooter, was great fun making called shots against spellcasters, smashing enemy potion bottles etc. Thinking about it now I'm not entirely aure why we don't use them now.

Do it! Play with them now!

S&P was great. Not that all the rules were great, heck, some of them were horrible. But, at least they gave me options to use as a DM to expand upon the rather lame (in comparison) 'basic' AD&D build.

Hicks
17-01-2012, 23:04
Videogame-wise: Steam made me stop playing computer games. That thing was so buggy and annoying when it came out, it was terrible. I paid good money for a game and you tell me I can't play because that crap can't download an update? Well you'll never see my money again.

Wargaming-wise: I haven't dropped whole games because of rage. I did drop armies for 40K, because of it (GKs), but I wouldn't drop the game completely because I just own too much stuff.

Gaming-wise: I pretty much stopped playing MTG with the last rules overhaul. I was an avid collector and player, but I have since sold everything but my power decks.

Nephilim of Sin
18-01-2012, 01:48
Gaming-wise: I pretty much stopped playing MTG with the last rules overhaul. I was an avid collector and player, but I have since sold everything but my power decks.

I started back during Zendikar (just after M10, I guess); I had already hated some of the rules changes brought up by 6th Edition, so, in hindsight, some of the changes weren't that bad. Still, with the loss of manaburn, and a few counter-intuitive changes they made (even recently), had I stayed throughout, I probably would have quit as well.

Tapped artifacts should be shut off. Tapped creatures in combat should not do combat damage. A creature with double strike, given trample, should not get to deal its extra attack to the player if it was blocked, and the blocker killed with the initial strike (especially since double strike doesn't normally work that way).

Still, the closest I have come to quitting M:TG was not due to the recent bannings, but the idiotic Valakut + Primeval ruling. It just makes no sense, was horribly done, and really screwed the game up more than Jace/Stoneforge ever did.

Warhammer-wise, I would have to say that I stuck with my O&Gs through all editions, especially the 'we made them suck' 7th Edition. The only reason I am not continuing to support the hobby is for other reasons which I can't mention here....:shifty:

chromedog
21-01-2012, 02:28
I've never been exclusive to just one game - usually playing two games or systems and alternating between them.
When I started SF gaming Battletech was the biggie and 40k the new kid on the block. It was a nice companion (1/300 or 6mm and 28-or-so mm).
Then BT died in my area with the coming of the Clans, but Kryomek was there, so it replaced BT. I stopped playing it (BT) because I had no-one to play it with, not because of the post Clan stuff. Then Warzone came along, and replaced Kryomek (because Kryomek stuff became impossible to source in the pre-web days), then Stargrunt or VOID.
Then I started up Infinity (yes, 40k was still the sideline to these other games).
Now, Infinity has become my main game, and 40k was pushed aside by Tomorrow's War (40k just got too large a game and the rules were stale). TW doesn't care which company's stuff you use. My IG or SM work well as humans or PA humans (with or without genetic enhancements).

I've never "Rage quit" over anything though. Just stopped playing due to lack of interest, no player base or lack of support.

It's normally the models that entice me to a game - but a game that lets me use what other stuff I've got (like 40k did in the beginning) is also good.

In the case of PP (WM/H), it's NOT the models that stop me playing it (they're what stop me BUYING them). It's the players around here. ******* and A-holes. The ones whom haven't seen the reprinted revised p5 comment. Sure, "play like you've got a pair" is fine - but it's not an excuse to be a knob.

biggabum
01-02-2012, 13:39
No not rage quit so to speak.

Had been playing GW games for 20+ years but I felt the rules had moved from tactical play to who rolled the most dice which tends to make all the games samey.

Then began to find that my local GW never had what i wanted in stock (and i mean its not a small shop), if i want a model/paint/tool in 10 days time i would actually wait 10 days before going to buy it. Then we had the discontinued paints, then we had more price rises, then we had paint pots that wouldnt stay open, then we had poor quality brushes (i have brushes from 5 or six years ago which may be a little worn but still keep their point, the new brushes tend to splay after two or three months). Then we had more price rises, then they reduced the amount of mini's we got in a box, then they brought in finecast (??? why dont any other companies seem to have the same problems with resin that GW do? even forgeworld stuff seemed to have less problems. Then got a plonker for a manager at our local store so stopped going in altogether.

Initially reluctant to try other games and was stupid enough to believed the GW hype that they are the biggest and best. but I got introduced to a few alternative games, and although they are similar in price to GW stuff, the quality of the mini's is at least the same if not better, but the rulsesets are far more my cup of tea, and the customer service is ten times better than GW.

Now im outside the GW bubble my interest in miniatures has rekindled, i buy better quality hobby tools and paints (cote d arms) for less money and they last longer. And although I do still play the odd GW game (bloodbowl, space hulk and dreadfleet) but will never be so blinkered to believe that GW are the best, and will always shop around for my gear and try out other games systems as they come along.

Kozbot
03-02-2012, 02:14
Videogame-wise: Steam made me stop playing computer games. That thing was so buggy and annoying when it came out, it was terrible. I paid good money for a game and you tell me I can't play because that crap can't download an update? Well you'll never see my money again.

Wargaming-wise: I haven't dropped whole games because of rage. I did drop armies for 40K, because of it (GKs), but I wouldn't drop the game completely because I just own too much stuff.

Gaming-wise: I pretty much stopped playing MTG with the last rules overhaul. I was an avid collector and player, but I have since sold everything but my power decks.

I find this interesting as I essentially stopped buying warhammer stuff due to steam. The enjoyment I get out of a single marine squad (about $40 American) is no where near what I could get by spending that money on games for sale on Steam. I know I've gotten far more enjoyment out of Batman: Arkham City than I would if I'd bought a Predator. Warhammer stuff comes out of my "entertainment" budget, and sadly GW models no longer give a reasonable return on investment so to speak.

Hendarion
04-02-2012, 21:54
I wouldn't boycott anything. Yea, I neither played in 3rd or 4th 40k, because I could've played only in the GW-store and didn't like the rules. But I still had the choice to play 2nd with my friends. So if 8th Fantasy is crap (or maybe 6th 40k) you could still play 7th Fantasy (or 5th 40k).
Dunno what's the deal.

Hicks
06-02-2012, 04:44
I find this interesting as I essentially stopped buying warhammer stuff due to steam. The enjoyment I get out of a single marine squad (about $40 American) is no where near what I could get by spending that money on games for sale on Steam. I know I've gotten far more enjoyment out of Batman: Arkham City than I would if I'd bought a Predator. Warhammer stuff comes out of my "entertainment" budget, and sadly GW models no longer give a reasonable return on investment so to speak.

There is that too, when you feel like you too little return for your investment, it's time to vote with you wallet. Personally, I don't play videogames much, except for the Street Fighter series, I already own the games and every other game I own hasn't managed to catch my attention more than for a few hours.

In my case, videogames aren't as fun as wargames, but I totally understand what you are saying.

Nurglitch_PS
06-02-2012, 14:27
I quit wh40k when the 3rd edition came about. Not so much a "rage quit", it's just that the rules were remade completely to give a dead 7 year old an equal chance of winning a game and since I was neither 7 nor dead I didn't really feel like a part of the target group.

I bought some 40k minis towards the middle of 4th ed, mainly because they were so pretty. I may even use them on the battlefield some time in the future.

Easy E
06-02-2012, 14:53
RAGE quit a game? No. However, my interest in playing games is very much reduced.

RAGE quit a job? Yes.

Coasty
06-02-2012, 19:44
I quit wh40k when the 3rd edition came about. Not so much a "rage quit", it's just that the rules were remade completely to give a dead 7 year old an equal chance of winning a game and since I was neither 7 nor dead I didn't really feel like a part of the target group.

Couldn't have said it better.

Ronin_eX
07-02-2012, 06:17
I prefer the term Indifference Quit. GW have jacked their prices up to the point where I don't feel like I get my money's worth out of them anymore. They no longer actively produce or promote anything that really interests me. I'll take another look at Fantasy when they finally get around to the Dwarf army book and I'll have another look at 40k after 6th Edition drops. If either of those disappoint me then I will continue playing other games because god knows there are a load of 'em.

Whitwort Stormbringer
13-02-2012, 21:29
I haven't quit a game so much as just stopped where it was, while the game moved forward. I pretty much quit keeping up to snuff around 3/4th ed. 40k and 6th ed. WFB. We had a pretty close-knit group of family/friends that would play, and since we were all pretty happy with the armies we had and the game as it was there wasn't really any pressure or reason to keep up with the changes GW was making.

I still buy the odd model if I like it and can work it into one of my old armies, but for the most part I'd say I've moved on to some smaller, quirkier minis companies and have also been getting into historical minis, although I haven't been able to actually play yet on account of my painfully slow painting and lack of players (at least that I've found). Pretty much all of my gaming time lately has been spent playing Quar since the company is local and there's a decent playerbase in my area, although when visiting family back home we'll pull out the cases of GW minis and play a few games.

IAMNOTHERE
13-02-2012, 21:46
Now I struggle to get this concept, I mean when the rules change surely (IMO) you go for the new rules and see how the game plays now? Staying with the older now out dated system is anathema to me. :)

I can see how the old edition rules are still perfectly playable, I can see how your armies will still work; but what would happen if one of your group liked a new model that wasn't available before? Would you stop playing the outdated version or exclude them from the group?

Personally I look forward to the challenge of a new edition and a reworking of how my favorite armies play. I could have rage quit in second ed 40k when I no longer got my 1200pt GK squad but really? I just opened Slaves to Darkness and rolled with the new toys :)

Whitwort Stormbringer
14-02-2012, 00:53
what would happen if one of your group liked a new model that wasn't available before? Would you stop playing the outdated version or exclude them from the group?

I'm as close as any of my gaming buddies comes to keeping in touch with the miniatures gaming world, so for the time-being it's really a non-issue. :p

The heyday of gaming for us was when most of us were in high school, and just after some of us started college. Anymore it's just a pastime for when we're all back home around the holidays or something. Also, there really aren't many new models that can't be represented by something from a previous edition, you just have to be OK with the occasional "counts-as."

But I'm not against the notion of learning a new edition, I just don't have any reason to yet. Certainly if the old group wanted to get back together and we decided we were interested in picking up the new stuff, or if I find the time and money to get involved with a local group, then I'd grab the new rules and get caught up. I doubt I'd go into army-building mode the way I used to because I just can't afford it, but I'd probably get a few choice units to bring the armies I do own in line with their new lists.

MarcoSkoll
14-02-2012, 02:34
What would happen if one of your group liked a new model that wasn't available before? Would you stop playing the outdated version or exclude them from the group?
That much is easy when you're in a casual gaming group. House rule it in.

Most of the people I game with on even a semi-regular basis are entirely familiar with the concept of player written rules and the principle of game balance being primarily maintained by getting bapped one around the head with the nearest rulebook if you're a jerk about it.

Freakiq
14-02-2012, 09:47
Started playing Warmachine alongside Warhammer because I had some friends ragequit.

Ended up selling my Menoth army though as the game felt too much like a CCG and had a too competitive atmosphere for me.
The fact that the community seemed to dislike conversions and creativity helped too.

Might try it again later now that they've switched to plastic and the playerbase might have matured a bit.