Some of this goes against conventional wisdom or other information and I think some of this stems from the opinion of the rep. rather than official policy or sentiment. Otherwise there is a lot of topics covered and a lot of good information here that it deserves some attention.

Please remember that none of this is official GW policy, and as such must be taken as rumors.

via anonymous sources
Had a long, interesting convo with my GW rep today.  It was pretty insightful.

Here are some notes, in no particular order...

-GW is not concerning themselves with game balance or competitive play in any respect.

-GW is totally fine with TOs tweaking the rules to create a more balanced game in / for tournament settings.  [Lots of talk about how GW tried the tournament scene and how independent TOs do a much, much better job.  They'd rather let the TOs run events and tweak the rules to create game balance in a tournament / competitive setting.]

-Supplements aren't designed with game balance in mind.  They are designed with fun / cool in mind.  [He sighted FoB and what they did with the Escalation rules many, many times over the ~hour long convo.]

-Expect to see more movement towards giving players the opportunity to use the models they own in games of 40k.

-GW has no PR department.  There will be no official announcement about any of this stuff or any article in WD.  They'd like people like me to communicate this sort of thing and "steer" the community in whatever direction we'd like based on it.

-While the stock did drop 25% overnight, based on that report, he went on at length about how GW is a dividend company and is still going to be paying out it's dividends.  Something about how 4 people own almost all of GW (stock), how profits on the whole are down (duh) but profit per dollar spent is way up (also duh).  Blah Blah, this means little.

-Weekly releases, which most of us knew about.

-Weekly WD starting in Feb.

-Monthly 230+ page magazine.

-The people that write the rules often don't remember what they write. [Spoke about convos he's had or been involved in with writers or stories he's heard.  Mentioned one instance of a guy asking one of the writers about a rule he wrote and the writer responded with something like, "yeah, that sounds cool.  why don't you guys play it that way from now on."]

-Costs increase.  They are not targeting everyone.  They "are not going to open a GW store in Compton." 

-They recognize they have priced new or potential players out of their games and plan to "address it."

-The term "gray beards" was used to compare GW gamers to model train guys.  An older, wealthier, group that doesn't see a ton of new people entering the hobby.

-They view the ~$200 start up cost as something that will provide the average person with a month's worth of "entertainment," comparable to roughly 3 video games.

-The rep dislikes the fact that people that are not qualified to write articles on GWs financial situation, policies, or direction often write articles on the internet that people take as gospel.

-They want to sell models based on coolness factor, not on price tag.  Cited an example where they reduced the price of WHFB cavalry models to 25 bucks (from 45) and there was absolutely no change in volume. (which, to be fair, IS a valid point.  when it comes to lots of model miniatures, if people want it, they're going to buy it.  at some point everyone will begin to consider price, but that number is different from person to person.)

-Mentioned how the Tau and Eldar books were mistakes in that they elevated expectations for the remaining 6th ed books.  Said not to expect all (any) books to be quite on that level going forward.  Mentioned how it's probably nice for "us" that the books were so strong. [brought up after i mentioned the tyranid book, escalation, dataslates.]

137 Comments:

  1. "The rep dislikes the fact that people that are not qualified to write articles on GWs financial situation, policies, or direction often write articles on the internet that people take as gospel."

    This. A thousand times THIS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So we should all say nothing and let GW provide their analysis. Oh no, of course they don't comment on their own policies and direction because they don't have a PR department.

      Delete
    2. ^ Agree with Jagged.

      If we didn't, Dakka Dakka, BOLS and even Faeit 212 would basically not be allowed to exist.

      Delete
    3. Erm... you also read the part about them not having a PR department, right? If you don't communicate, people will do it for you. Simple really.

      Delete
    4. Well, if he's going to whine about that on "4 people own almost all of GW (stock)"...

      There are nine large shareholders, between them they own 61% of the company, leaving 39% in the hands of smaller shareholders.

      The Nomad Investment Partnership LP 3,131,194 9.8
      Investec Asset Management Limited 3,087,765 9.7
      Ruffer LLP 2,492,260 7.8
      Tom Kirby 2,131,394 6.7
      Phoenix Asset Management Partners Limited 1,865,218 5.9
      FIL Limited 1,753,900 5.5
      Legal and General Group plc 1,683,901 5.3
      Schroders plc 1,677,861 5.3
      Artemis Investment Management LLP 1,620,001 5.1

      Mostly they look like big investment organisations, apart from the Chairman Tom Kirby who owns just under 7% of the company.The other current directors have only small shareholdings in the company.

      http://investor.games-workshop.com/shareholder-statistics/

      Delete
    5. I agree Chris. Admittedly I am exceedingly biased as a former GW employee and a professional advertiser - I'm not going to argue that I'm a model of objectivity. But some of the hysterical, commercially illiterate drivel which we all end up reading on hobby sites really offends me. Examples.

      "GW's stock dropped, they're going down!" - they predicted a dip, all of my old friends who still work for GW have been muttering about it for a while. Part of the drop to 5 day opening. GW has no corporate debt to speak of, a situation most companies would kill for.

      "GW don't care about Tyranids!" I used this as an example because it's so recent, and there are people who astonishingly hold the view that GW actively wants to harm its own sales. These people display the odd cognitive dissonance of believing that GW is simultaneously money-grabbing and trying to undermine its own products (and thus taking).

      "This codex/arm book is not competitive so GW are idiots!" - I've seen this one a lot recently. As the rep above said, GW are trying to cull competitive gamers and promote to fluffy hobbyists. This seems harsh, but but I worked for GW very competitive gamers were unfailingly the ones who bitched about GW all the time and played with models from the early 90's. On the rare occasion they did buy a model it was very great bitterness. Fluffy gamers who get excited about cool stuff and aren't so competitive (I'm guilty) spent more money and promoted a more pleasant atmosphere. I worked there for quite a long while. This was what I witnessed, even though I wouldn't have thought it before.

      "This stupid new force organisation chart will destroy 40k inside a year!" - a wonderful chestnut I heard when 3rd ed came out (I was at secondary school, now I'm 30 and 40k still hasn't failed). It was a popular cry at the time. Maybe GW did know what direction to take?

      Overall, really interesting to read. I sympathise with the guy. And especially the fact that he says GW doesn't target everyone. If only everyone base understood!

      Delete
    6. Mr GW Rep, don't complain about not being able to steer the conversation online when your online presence is non-existent. Check your privilege.

      Delete
    7. Agree with Chris, that is a big problem. It isn't about people writing about it, bloggers gotta blog, the problem is people on the internet acting like someone sitting in their basement is suddenly an authority on the financial health of a company because they're really good at painting.

      It infects and poisons the entire community when people are presenting their uneducated opinion as fact and readers don't put it in the proper context.

      Delete
    8. @GMSN: you should follow your own advice.
      I too agree with Chris. You can always have an opinion, but it'll always be an opinion.

      Delete
    9. @Matt Charman

      I agree with pretty much everything you've stated there, can't really add much more to that to be honest.

      I'd say the overly negative minority (not saying you should be positive about everything but I'm talking more of the "GW are evil/destroying the game/trying to make an army uncompetitive" types) do have quite a commanding presence on the various forums and do seem to be quite damaging to the on-line part of the hobby to me, but then again that's true of most areas of the net.

      As a race we tend to be quick to criticise and slow to praise unfortunately.

      Delete
    10. Heh, Apple corporate feels the same way, I'm sure, but in their case its major newspapers publishing speculative nonsense detached from reality. GW really can't complain about a problem they're doing nothing to resolve.

      Delete
    11. I have seen some comments rage hating against GW in regards to Tyranids. But the majority of comments I've seen and agree with take the position that GW design team could have made a better job of the book. My own view is that it's just badly designed, when compared with say, the Necron or Tau codex. Are we allowed to say that without being accused of being 'hysterical' or 'uneducated' or 'poisoning the community'?

      Delete
    12. Matt, can you see how:
      "there are people who astonishingly hold the view that GW actively wants to harm its own sales. These people display the odd cognitive dissonance of believing that GW is simultaneously money-grabbing and trying to undermine its own products"

      disagrees with:
      "As the rep above said, GW are trying to cull competitive gamers and promote to fluffy hobbyists."?

      Here's the thing - most of us are "fluffy" gamers, at least in our hearts. There comes a point where every 40k player realises there are better systems out there with better rules - the background is realistically the only thing keeping us from quitting 40k at all. If they are determined to drive out a significant portion of their consumer base, they are themselves trying to cripple their own sales. How does a new player get interested if the game is as it is at the moment - a bloated mess of incoherent rules with frequent balance problems? Do you think someone who sees that in a game played in store will rush to buy the rulebook with all the background in? No, they'll just balk at the prices and not enjoy themselves, so never buy into the game. I've seen it happen in my local area and I'm sure others will have as well. How many pick up games have you seen in the past 3 months? I've seen 4, 2 of which were players I've not seen since who looked utterly miserable. The game, as it stands, is a nightmare. The rules are convoluted, riddled with issues unfixed by FAQs for almost 10 months; the dataslates mean that FOC is basically non-existent for many armies, yet a bad detriment to others; the dataslates themselves go from basically pointless (the Eldar ones) to an obvious money making scheme (the new one with 0-6 Stormtalons). I don't begrudge GW for trying to appeal to a particular type of gamer, nor trying to make money as so many others seem to find a great evil, but the current state of things is ridiculous and, in many of our opinions, untenable. If they wanted to make the game revolve around PvP, the armies should be fair so that pick up games function. If they want to make the game into more of a D&D style questing system, they should dispose of the points system altogether and write scenarios instead of random mission tables in the main rulebook. Currently, they neither appeal to the gamer who just wants a fun game, the child with little to no money, the tournament player who wants a fair game with tight rules nor the fluffy gamer as it's rare to ever see a "fluffy" list and indeed, many armies can't even make all their fluffy lists regardless due to codex restrictions; this is without even appealing to people without time for a 3 hour game or people sick of random tables dictating the game and often ruining immersion (e.g. when a nobody becomes a Daemon Prince, a warlord tries to make a jungle carniverous on a desert board or psykers not knowing what they can cast before battle) which are also a disaster. I think many of us are in the same boat I am - love the models, love the lore, love the characters but just cannot have fun with the game like this.

      Delete
    13. Well said! The game is a mess and I see it played less and less...

      Delete
    14. There's an answer to that : go play something else. Simple.

      Delete
    15. Eyjio, you can't use your home store as an anecdote for the entire 40k community. I've actually recently started playing in a club with people who didn't start playing until after 6th came out and they have no problems with the rules. If we have an issue with a rule and we're not sure we get a third opinion, resolve, and move on. We've never had any fights or problems with rules that can't be resolved in less than ten minutes. I also occasionally play at another store that, though the community has contracted somewhat since its hey day, still sports regular tournies and has people who show up to play on 40k nights (if it was on a different night I'd be one of those regulars too). Again, it's not drawing the same numbers as people have jumped to different systems, but it's not shrinking and the occasional new player shows up. No one has the issues on rules that you're talking about and I usually don't see someone looking miserable when they lose. Randomness doesn't run rampant and WAAC lists hardly ever make an appearance. One guy won one tourney with Tau and then brought Orcs to the next because that was his usual army and the community is more focused on having fun and they don't get caught up in all the internet noise. The fact is that maybe your local area is moving on from 40k, but that doesn't mean the entire community is. The biggest complaint is price, which is a valid concern, but the general consensus is that 6th edition rule set is actually pretty good and rules that are confusing or give too much power to certain units can always be tweaked in favor of just having a good time and playing a game.

      That's why I play 40k and have no plans to stop.

      Delete
    16. @ChubToad: I'm not sure what you mean? Can you elaborate?

      Delete
    17. Ultimately what we can take away form most of this conversation is that Games Workshop still has the bizarre idea that the internet is a fad and globalization is something that happens to other people....

      Delete
    18. I agree with Chris Kyle completely. Yes, some people have moved on to other game systems for different reasons in my local area (which is pretty big), but 40K is flourishing, not dying. I hang out at my FLGS quite a bit (too much, if you ask my wife, LOL) and I see new players showing up all the time, from the father and son duo who pick up the DV starter box (or young couple who does this), to the guys who just fell out of the sky and started hanging out, and now have 1,850+ points of [Insert Army Name Here] painted up already! and are playing games on a regular basis! or even an irregular basis! but keep turning up.

      Pick up games are never a problem in my area. I have made a lot of 40K friends, and we have a local forum on which you can post on the "Looking For A Game" forum and end up making a new friend. I just posted there last night looking for a game tomorrow night, and already got a guy I've never met who's "been more of a hobbyist but now wants to start getting games in". We texted, sounds like a nice guy, I'll probably play him tomorrow & likely make a new 40K buddy, with whom I can arrange future games.

      There's nothing wrong with the current rules or the 6th Ed codexes; take that from a CSM player who only runs 2 Heldrakes at the most, and that at 2K points, and sometimes (usually lately) not even that many of them.

      Sorry your local scene sucks Elysian, but overall 40K is doing just fine... It's the bitter, vocal minority on the interwebs that make it seem like there's problems. That and WAAC players who've had their best "I win by Turn 3" buttons nerfed, and I have no pity for them...

      Delete
    19. ^Those exclamation marks are supposed to be commas. I have no idea why my iPad keeps doing that, but it's extremely annoying...

      Delete
    20. ^And I meant Eyjio, not Elysian... Sorry...

      Delete
    21. The amount of times I have tried to correct people on fundamental inaccuracy's in there understanding of financial data, as an accountant myself, and get called a white knight for correcting basic lack of knowledge, it's no surprise a GW rep is fed up with it.

      Delete
    22. Let me give a very flippant example to illustrate the point I was agreeing with:

      Random Blog/Forum post: "It's gonna be 'Nidvember, folks! Some guy emailed me to say Tyranids are definitely coming in November, without any doubt"
      *No Tyranids in November*
      Internet Commentators: "RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE!!!! This is all GWs fault!!! They're screwing me over!!!!!! I'm never ever ever going to spend another penny on them again!!!!!!!!!"

      The problem is not that people shouldn't write about what GW is doing - of course they should, and I do it all the time - but taking as "fact" assertions by people who are not in a position to know for sure, or cannot provide proof, is the reader's mistake - not the writer's or GWs (who usually get the blame through some twist of logic).
      If I write a piece on what I think is GW's "direction" then I'll be drawing conclusions based on recent events (that have actually happened, not rumours) and insight from multiple decades of following them, and they may be logical conclusions... but I'll still be guessing in the end because I'm in no position to know for sure. It's the same for 99.5% of us.

      I do wish GW would engage more with the community, but given the high levels of knee-jerk rage to every little "fact" out there, I can understand why they don't bother.

      Delete
    23. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    24. Well but what if people that DO know what they are talking about analyse the situation and write about it ? AND these people will buy from the competition. GW you are NOT the Hobby, you are a part of it. A large but declining part. GET OVER IT. The verdict of the people that HAVE the competence to talk about it seems to be very clear. Next thing GW and its fanboys want to tell us is that -12 % sales is the best thing since landing on the moon (aka failcast).

      Delete
    25. See I am the definition of a fluff gamer, so I don't mind a move towards a less competitive game. However, GW shouldn't be angry at fans for being competitive or expecting balanced rules when they have never said that is not their intent. I think their issue is they are taking their company in a certain direction and not telling anyone so as not to alienate customers, but by not telling people (not having PR is ridiculous) they make people more angry, and worse more speculative.

      Delete
    26. Eyjio hits the nail on the head. It is inherently self destructive to drive consumers out. A balanced game is a fun game. I'm as tired as the next guy of constantly losing for no real reason, and I'm not even competitive.

      Chris: if he cannot submit anecdotal EXPERIENCE as evidence, either can you. Your diatribe is equally as invalid as his assertion. Are there people happy with GW? Sure. Are there people who aren't? Clearly. Maybe, just maybe, the people who aren't happy might know what they'd like, and are sick and tired of arrogant prats telling them they are stupid.

      Delete
    27. I consider myself a fluffy player & I enjoy competition. Both of these are being ripped to shreds by GW now. The rules & releases are tearing apart what was once canon & we can't play a single game without a 1 hour conversation before hand to make sure we understand all the various interpretations of the rules. Then we can finally get to playing the 3-5 hour game, depending on how many different random tables & rolls there are & how many times per turn we have to move each model. I can't remember the last time I saw a horde army that wasn't a gun line. 2nd edition was so much fluffier & balanced, which is just mind boggling for me to say.

      Delete
  2. I don't think a GW rep is qualified to say what authors of books do and do not remember. I am pretty sure that a GW author works very hard and remembers what he writes for a specific codex(s), after all he is paid very well for this. And as for GW not being concerned for balance, it would appear that IF that is the case, dropping the balance concerned ended up making the game much better; The 6ed has been the best in a while, including its codecies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Working hard on a project doesn't guarantee remembering what you wrote.

      I've written many worlds, game concepts, rules, etc. But when you write so much, what is "final" and what is "test" can easily get blurred.

      I claim nothing about GW's writers, but if they're anything like other writers, it all depends on volume of material created.

      Delete
    2. honestly the way the writer responded is a poor example too. "ohh hey if that rule works for you great use it" is a pretty standard response from gaming writers for those types of set ups. I've not ahd the pleasure of talking to 40k writers but I've been able to talk to other people in the feild and they very much have that approuch a lot of the time. the over arching additude is "ohh hey it's your game, just have some fun with it"

      Delete
    3. I gotta be honest, that whole thing seems like total BS to me; like some nerd wrote this to win an argument on BOLS.

      Delete
  3. "-GW is not concerning themselves with game balance or competitive play in any respect.

    -GW is totally fine with TOs tweaking the rules to create a more balanced game"

    Can we at least have a fun game? Half the stuff isn't actually enjoyable to play against or with at the moment. If they're not trying to balance the game, not making it smoother to play and actively making it less enjoyable for many of us (especially in pick up games where you basically toss a coin as to whether you're facing the net list du jour or someone who constantly complains your list is too good when they brought a fluffy penal legion IG list), what the heck are they actually doing? Why even hire a rules team if you don't care? I mean, they're terrible at writing the actual rules and they have actual writers from the Black Library they could just pull across to write the fluff, so what is the job of the "design team"?

    Well, whatever, I guess I'll just continue to focus on other stuff until someone figures out that facing a gun line which deploys troops at the last second every game is pretty boring. Really hoping this isn't true, because it shows blatant disregard for consumers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. It is something that been apparent for quite some time now. The Rep is just confirming what we already knew in that respect.

      Delete
    3. Agreed. A game isn't fun if you have almost no chance of winning. If GW continues to not take game balance seriously then people (i.e. customers) will just migrate to game systems that do take game balance seriously, and GW sales and therefore profits will continue to decline.

      Delete
    4. You do have a chance though with updated rules. The problem is updated rules are more quick fix's that do not address the problems of balance.on a whole (and in some cases making it, much much worse). Quick fixes and lazy rule writing has been staple for years now and we still continue to buy and play.

      Delete
    5. What good is it to say that they will leave it to the TOs to work out when the regular pickup game doesn't have a TO? I guess the only way to make a balanced game is to make a complete set of house rules in your club that everyone agrees with. Kinda pointless to even play 40k if that is the case.

      Delete
    6. Some of us continue to buy and play. The player base is dramatically reduced in my area, and I'm the last of my regular gaming group still bothering with GW stuff at all. Whether GW wants to admit it or not, the game is half the hobby, half the reason people buy their models to begin with.

      Being ok with reduced profits so long as costs go down faster isn't going to work for them in the long run, unless the official plan is to wind down production until they don't make anything so they can close up shop and sell the IP.

      Delete
    7. How many games have you played against a primed/meta/has read fluff player? Me more than a painted, fluffy, balanced list...

      Delete
    8. I have a gunline of IG consisting of only troops and a company comand =D

      Delete
    9. I don't understand this problem some of you are bitching about in regards to pickup games. Are you really that out of touch with your own local hobby community that everyone you play with is someone new every game, whom you know nothing about, including what armies they play and what they're likely to bring?

      We all live in communities, and within those communities of people is a gaming community. Wherever it is that you play regularly, be it a FLGS or a club or the local pub (you lucky Brits!), if you're a regular, then you should know, at least peripherally, who the other regulars, and even irregulars are. It's not like there are nomadic groups of gamers who travel from town to town in search if pick up games with which to crush your spirit with their "no fun" lists.

      Try a little pre-game communication! Ask them what army they're bringing, and if there's something that you're tired of getting crushed by, like 5 Riptides spam, ask them to try something different for a change, for both of your sakes. I've had people ask me not to bring flyers because they have no real answer for them and don't like facing them, and I was fine with that. If you're surprised by what they end up deploying, and that's what leads to you not having any fun in pickup games, then you really need to consider your part in that outcome...

      Delete
  4. Like I had mentioned, there is some of this that are very much the opinion of the rep, some of which is not true and does not make much sense.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He sounds as dismayed with his employers as most of us are and who can blame him? lol
      Poor guy/gal. I think I'd rather work for Amazon atm..

      Delete
  5. Lol
    Its funny cause true. :D

    They should really get a PR expert. Modeltrain company died. Its not like you can keep on cutting cost and hikeing prices for.ever!!! Some Day no Body will be playing due to this arrogant attitude GW has.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I still feel good for Tau. They were bad for so long, they deserved the break. Eldar too. If you have old models in your army that prove you have been playing them since before they were the "in" armies, kuddos. So they feel that those were 'mistakes' so I guess 'ndis took the brunt of that. I'm still having fun with them and enjoy playing the role of the underdog, I just wish the company did a better job of foresight and thinking through the gameplay consequences of their decisions. They might not care, but the players of the game do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tau were bad for part of one edition. They were great in 3rd. They were great in 4th. They are great in 6th.

      Eldar likewise were so broken in 2nd edition they forced the creation of 3rd. In 3rd they were always in the top 3 between invinci-skimmers and disruption tables and Starcannons. In 4th they were very strong and were clearly on top towards the end thanks to flying circus and invinciskimmers, and were pretty solid in the beginning of 5th, and are once again.

      They certainly never had to deal with the kick likee Dark Eldar or Imperial Guard did, neither of which were ever particularly good until partway through 5th edition.

      Delete
    2. Or chaos and Nids, Who despite being right up there for late 3rd/early 4th (or up till early 5th for nids) have just had 2 editions of terrible rules crammed down their throats

      Delete
  7. "-GW is not concerning themselves with game balance"

    And this is why we can't have nice things.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I usually try to stay pretty positive about GW (except when it comes to Finecast), but roughly translated, this rep seems to be saying:

    GW: Hey customers, f*** you.
    Customers: But, but...?
    GW: No, honestly, f*** you.

    Pretty harsh. Hope this is just one rep's opinion. If nothing else, it demonstrates why GW needs to:

    1 - hire better reps
    2 - create a PR department

    ReplyDelete
  9. Am I interpreting this wrong or are they saying that following codecies aren't going to be as strong as Tau or Eldar?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spot on from the sounds of it but that really means nought these days anyway with rules being updated with supplements, data slates and WD updates. The codices might be weak but any of the above can change things up so don't worry to much if is true.

      Delete
    2. So they are saying if you want to play competitively then go get Tau and Eldar as they will be on the top of the heap for a long time???

      Delete
    3. What he is really saying is that the Tau and Eldar codeci are too strong and everything else will be more or less balanced. Which is one of the reasons for play falling off in my area-why go to your LFGS and just get beaten by the Taudar player? This was the same problem we had in 5th when the 1-2 punch of under-costed Space Wolves and over-powered Grey Knights came out.
      And who wrote 2 of those 4 codeci? Phil Kelly. His Space wolves ruined 5th, starting down this long path and ending with his Wave Serpent Death Spam hobby-finishing move.
      Thanks Phil. If I ever meet you I'll kick you in the nuts...

      Delete
  10. Man, that rep sounds smug as hell. "We're not going to open a store in Compton". Yeah buddy, doing a great job disproving the belief that GW are a bunch of pricks.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I would totally go to a GW in Compton

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably a good case for why having a PR department is a good idea, they'd tell you not to make comments about an area with a racial association, it makes your organization sound racist when reported 2nd hand later.

      Delete
  12. An interesting article. I gotta say though that if this is true GW truely feels like a dinosaur that is going to go extinct. They seem to be in complete denial of what people actually want. All the games that seem to be really gaining ground have something in common: A large focus on creating balanced, competent rules (games like WM, Flames of War, Infinity, etc). To just straight up say "we dont care about our rules at all" makes me say "Why the hell am I playing this game?" This fact way more then price or anything else is what has myself and most of my game group shelving their GW stuff in favor of more streamlined game systems

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well it is maybe time for game workshop to enter 21st century and start to comunicate all these things to people as they are. They tested it on Eddie and in my opinion, to have someone who you can ask anything and he will answer somehow is a great leap for games workshop and great way to grow again

    ReplyDelete
  14. Why can't they hire just one PR person?

    To be clear, I am not saying they SHOULD or saying I know better. I am literally curious why a public company would not have a PR person? I just want to be educated.

    As far as I am concerned, Eddie from GW digital is their PR department (seems like a nice guy at least).

    ReplyDelete
  15. Wow, that was some pretty rough reading! Doesn't really do anything to paint GW in a positive light, I guess it's just one guy, though, so who knows what's what really.

    While I do sympathize that it must be frustrating seeing armchair business speculation when they know what is really going on, it's kind of inevitable that people are going to speculate and come to their own conclusions in the complete absence of any PR messaging from themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That read is depressing as hell. Not surprising in the least, but to have confirmation that what GW does is essentially done out of malice rather than incompetence is just... wow!

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Expect to see more movement towards giving players the opportunity to use the models they own in games of 40k." opposed to using what exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  18. You know what's 'fun' game design? A game where i can play whichever models I like and still have a fair game with an opponent who does the same.

    You know what game design encourages me to buy a lot of models, instead of just the one or two units in each book that actually work? A game where I can play whichever models I like and still have a fair game with an opponent who does the same.

    A company ok with dramatically shrinking profits as long as their costs are also shrinking is a company ok with going out of business.

    If GW doesn't want to produce decent rules, then they should sublet the rules-writing portion of the hobby out to someone who does.

    ReplyDelete
  19. One lone GW rep is hardly a source we should be taking as gospel. I honestly believe that this guy was probably talking out of his rear on some of these points. As always, I have my salt shaker on hand. It's been a good run lately, and I've been pretty pleased with everything I've seen. Except the sisters update. Just kick out a new codex already.

    ReplyDelete
  20. One lone GW rep is hardly a source we should be taking as gospel. I honestly believe that this guy was probably talking out of his rear on some of these points. As always, I have my salt shaker on hand. It's been a good run lately, and I've been pretty pleased with everything I've seen. Except the sisters update. Just kick out a new codex already.

    ReplyDelete
  21. One lone GW rep is hardly a source we should be taking as gospel. I honestly believe that this guy was probably talking out of his rear on some of these points. As always, I have my salt shaker on hand. It's been a good run lately, and I've been pretty pleased with everything I've seen. Except the sisters update. Just kick out a new codex already.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'm sorry... I am starting to HATE the direction GW is going. Piling on rules after rules with no concern about balance and playability is just wrong. The game is getting too cumbersome. It is impossible to keep track of the basic rules, the codices, the supplements, the data sheets, Escalation, Fortifications, AND Forge World printed and prototype rules. Stop this. If they put one person who's job it is to look at the tournament lists and look at the forums and make tweaks to the rules and update the FAQ, then I bet they would sell more models, players would have more fun, and they would make more money. As it is I see them heading toward a downward spiral.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not here to challenge your position, but I'm curious about your frustration about GW's push for new rules. What is it about this approach that is problematic? To me, I like the idea that the game doesn't need to sit static rules-wise between editions now, and that Codexes will evolve more gradually rather than plateauing for years and years. I get that it can be hard to keep up with all of the changes, but it doesn't seem to me like they are really suggesting you need to; I think the idea is that you just play with the rules you and your group own, and pick and choose from game to game, to add some variety and possibilities.

      If they had official tournament support with mandated rules updates for those participating I would be crying foul too with this piecemeal approach, unless the updates were free. But since tournaments are clearly as far from their mind as possible, I think the variety they are injecting into their game is a good thing.

      Delete
    2. I can at least answer that from my own stance. The rules are already bloated with just the main rules. I mean there's what, 63 special rules in the main book, 7 types of unit and then al the subrules for actually doing basic actions like shooting, look out sirs, etc. On top of that, each codex introduces about 4 (regularly more) of their own unique army wide rules. Then, you have character specific special rules on each and every special character in the game. Then, you have the charts, knowledge of which supplements are used in game, dataslates, points, FOC, allies, forge world, etc. All told, there's over 200 special rules in the game, at least 24 different units type combinations, 3 charts, all the random weird charts in codices, all the dataslates, allowed allies... the game is a mess before you've done anything. I'm yet to see a game of 40k EVER take place without someone checking a rulebook, FAQ or their codex, which is insane when you think about it.

      Now we also have the supplements, yet more dataslates, probably more supplements on the way. It's mental. We all wanted fast updates to fix issues with the game, which, at the start of 6e it looked like they were beginning to do. Now it just seems like every new thing which comes out has to be interpreted by the community as a whole, analysed to figure out what it REALLY means in many corner cases and only then is it usable with confidence. It also tends to force less variety as people get closer and closer to the one list which just beats everything on average. So yeah, it'd be nice if it did change the game but really it's limiting us and makes the game needlessly fiddly.

      Delete
    3. I can't understand it, didn't they say that the trend was going to do a more streamlined rules?????? What the f+++ are they doing now???

      Delete
  23. 40K as a hobby has been a big part of my life for the past 13 years. In that time, I've seen nothing but increasing contempt, hostility and greed coming from GW, and seeing this sort of arrogance is damn near the straw that breaks the camels back for me. I don't care about what GW apologists or GW-"haters" have to say - all I know is I don't feel "good" about being in this hobby any more or supporting a company that displays such ugly behavior towards it's supporters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been in and around the hobby for around 25 years and I've seen absolutely none of what you say to be true, I've almost always (there's always one or two bad apples) had a positive time with fellow gamers and GW representatives and I've also seen the models, art, publications and so on increase incredibly in their quality.
      The perceived "ugly behaviour" towards it's supporters is no more than internet nonsense as far as I'm concerned.

      Delete
    2. stop_not_liking_what_I_like.jpg

      You'll see what you want to see, particularly if you're the type that likes to be a smug, pedantic contrarian. I don't *want* to see the company that produces the hobby material I've invested so much time and money in act like a bunch of moustache-twirling evil robber-baron a-holes, but that's what I see.

      Delete
    3. Yup the way I see it if you don't like it then go play something else.

      Delete
    4. Red Iam playing other things, and luckily for the price of a GW army I have started two systems with rule books two factions for each plus fame table halved in size. When I started 40k 1994 it was all about hobby, they pushed painting, modeling, and fluffy builds. Rules were very balanced tourneys ran like this number points and no specials every army was there plus games played in less than two hours. Now I can guess what armies will be playing every time I go to store, and I can also tell you what they are playing....

      Delete
    5. @Lew, try to forget about red, he's a one idea man. :)

      It is the second time he shows exactly the same elitist comment.

      Delete
    6. @Lew, sorry but the rules were a hot mess in 1984 and any semblance of balance was completely nonexistent. Games took 6-8 hours to finish and army movement was less than it is now.

      Delete
  24. One lone GW rep is hardly a source we should be taking as gospel. I honestly believe that this guy was probably talking out of his rear on some of these points. As always, I have my salt shaker on hand. It's been a good run lately, and I've been pretty pleased with everything I've seen. Except the sisters update. Just kick out a new codex already.

    ReplyDelete
  25. well, not quite that interesting a conversation, not at all. And most of the statements arent even that thought out, true or intorspective.

    Yeah but cmoun man, we need voices that defend GW. After all they secreew their fans on a regular base.

    ReplyDelete
  26. You should all start playing 30k! Sure its more expensive, but the support is insanely good. The Forge World team are a delight to talk to (except one who ignored me once in Bugmans). The game is balanced, the miniatures nice, there are primarches!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get bored enough of 'marines vs. marines' and 'imperial vs. imperial' all the time in regular 40k. The prospect of going to 30k where Xenos factions don't even exist in the first place is a prospect so boredom inducing that I'd rather play cookie clicker.

      Delete
    2. You do know that 30k uses the exact same rules set that 40k right? So in that regard are you saying that 40k is balanced?

      Delete
    3. Guess what ! its the Codex that brings the unbalance not the base rulset.

      Delete
  27. Could an economist in the peanut gallery explain to me how a company can be facing reduced profits - ie, they are making less money per dollar they spend - yet somehow be seeing increased profit per dollar spent, without cooking their books or doing something else shady?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe he was talking about the stock dividends where the dividend is given out per stock, so if the stock price falls by 25% then the dividend is a higher percentage compared to the price of the stock.

      Delete
  28. "Cited an example where they reduced the price of WHFB cavalry models to 25 bucks (from 45) and there was absolutely no change in volume. (which, to be fair, IS a valid point..."

    Um, no; that's not how it works. You can't draw that conclusion from reducing one unit's price. ; |

    I spend a ton on this hobby, (FW like crazy), but GW has priced me out of the plastic kits, that's significant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So it's fair to asume that you consider plastic kits rather expensive but you spend 'crazy' amounts of money in FW, which is much more expensive than said kits?

      Delete
    2. True, it took years to alienate large portions of the fanbase and it ill take years to get em back. This singular and isolated price decrease means nothing. But this information is out there now, probably GW just want us to think this is true, kinda makin the desision for us what to thik about this price thing.

      Delete
    3. It's indeed not how it works. Cavalry is just not very important in WHFB right now, so people won't buy a lot of cavalry. But to understand that he'd also have to understand that there is a correlation between model sales and rules, and they really seem in denial about that, sadly.

      Delete
  29. "-GW is not concerning themselves with game balance"

    I think whilst this reads badly, what they mean is they're not going to Math-Hammer it down to a precise balance, but they're not going to release a 4 point space marine anytime soon like MtG would've.

    GW hasn't been concerned with balance since Warhammer got revamped and all unit champions were a 10p upgrade no matter if he was a 3 point goblin or 40 point ogre (one extra attack on a gobbo or 3 extra goblins each with an attack and wound)! I'm not bitter, just citing as an example.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you kidding me? Magic the Gathering puts ridiculous effort into rules balance, with extensive play testing and even hiring designers from tournament player ranks. They carefully manage their competitive scene, are extremely precise in their rules wording so their games aren't confusing or ambiguous, and ban or restrict cards when something gets through the cracks.

      MtG is like the opposite of GW in terms of rules writing quality and in particular in terms of effort put into that rules writing quality.

      Maybe over in the D&D wing of WotC....

      Delete
    2. I remember when GW hired the best players to write rules....

      Delete
  30. So:

    - They don't care about a huge chunk of their market
    - They don't care about outreach
    - They don't care about their public image
    - They don't care that their codexes are unbalanced
    - They don't care about quality control
    - They don't care that their models are overpriced
    - They don't like it that people complain

    And yet, they're flummoxed as to why their profits are down and people are leaving in droves? GW, you're hacking huge holes in your own boat and wondering why your legs are wet.

    I love the hobby aspect of it, but, like so many others, it's tough to do anymore. Other, better things cost less, and fewer and fewer people I know actually play. It's sad, but things like this validate the doom and gloom forecasts you see out the on the internet. Maybe it's time to sell before the models are worthless....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They also supposedly don't care about revenue, profits, or share prices, so long as they keep funneling dividends to their share holders. At least they aren't losing money yet, I guess.

      But yeah, it doesn't seem like GW care about their game or their consumers in the least, and its felt like that for ages.

      Delete
  31. Sounds like an absolute load of bollocks and conjecture. I fail to believe that GW have no PR department.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Believe it. My mate at the Beeb was trying to reach them over a story last year and they flat out told him there's no PR dept, and they don't do media request. Not even an agency!

      Delete
    2. LOL That's slightly mental, I'm still raising an eyebrow!

      What story was that for?

      Delete
  32. -They recognize they have priced new or potential players out of their games and plan to "address it."

    Are we not seeing this for the first time today? They are doing reduced deals on Tyranid bundles!! Is this not unprecedented for GW to ever offer deals on products and there for huge news?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "My husband didn't beat me *once* today! Now that's love!"

      Delete
    2. I mean I know they do started boxes deals and that but 2 Carnifexs at £55?? I'm not sure i have seen a deal like that before ever from GW.

      Delete
    3. I'm not saying its a good deal lol but it is still unprecedented for GW to offer things at a reduced cost like this.

      Delete
    4. The Christmas bundles were all discounted from what the models would have been individually, and bundle discounts USED to be the norm. So, no, not unprecedented at all.

      Delete
    5. Okay well I did not see the Christmas bundles at all. I'd still say this is very interesting though considering before this year, you wouldn't of thought GW even knew the meaning of the word discount here we are seeing them not even used in a holiday offer.

      Delete
    6. They have had battle force? boxes and other such for quite a while now, so no it is not a new thing. They also offer the Wall of Martyrs Tempestus Firebase at a good discount, but that may also be due to the non-existent rules previously of the Wall of Martyrs defense boxes (doesn't take a genius to figure out models without rules in the game are going to sell like crap).

      Delete
    7. Back in original apoc, massive deals. 5 carnifexes for $140 for example, and every formation they had models for(like the one click bundles) had deals between 30-40% off. Think the best I saw was 10 Ogryn, commissar, and metal junior officer squad for $90

      Delete
  33. "GW has no PR department. There will be no official announcement about any of this stuff or any article in WD."

    and...

    "The rep dislikes the fact that people that are not qualified to write articles on GWs financial situation, policies, or direction often write articles on the internet that people take as gospel."

    Gee, if there were only some way to communicate what you wanted with your costumers. Oh, well...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Egads man! That would take an entire DEPARTMENT of people who knew how to relate to the public? Who in the world has such a thing?

      Delete
    2. We need to see the word "egads" far more often. Kudos!

      Delete
    3. Lucasfilm has a "relationship with fans" department. The director is the greatest collector and fan: Steve Sansweet.

      Delete
  34. I dunno, part of me wonders if this Rep is just trolling the internet...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the same thing - this sounds too conveniently like the crap you see in the forums. I think it's just some nerd faking this to win an argument.

      Delete
  35. -GW has no PR department. There will be no official announcement about any of this stuff or any article in WD. They'd like people like me to communicate this sort of thing and "steer" the community in whatever direction we'd like based on it.

    -The rep dislikes the fact that people that are not qualified to write articles on GWs financial situation, policies, or direction often write articles on the internet that people take as gospel.

    This is why I think GW are a foolishly run company. They KNOW that people are going to write things and speculate about them, and they KNOW other people will believe that...why not just get it together, tell us what you want us to hear, and control the story yourselves!?! This is 2014, not 1994! There's no reason to be this inept at using the internet to further your ends in this day and age.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, the lack of self awareness is simply staggering.

      Delete
    2. Well they do try to Bully and Sue people/ compaines they don't like.

      Delete
    3. Only those that are unlikely to actually go to court with them. Or why is CMON allowed to use and show GW minis? Why are there GW minis in the Videos there? Maybe because CMON WOULD love to stand in court and see GW admit defeat?

      Delete
  36. I've seen this crop up all over the internet with slight detail changes. If this were the first time I saw this thats one thing... but...

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Expect to see more movement towards giving players the opportunity to use the models they own in games of 40k"

    Unless they're made by Chapterhouse...

    ReplyDelete
  38. It is very clear that GW has problems. For example letting the STORE MANAGERS act as there PR.

    No balance means its not a game!
    Pricing based on "coolness" WTF? ???

    Some of the reviews on GW's bussines are actually done by people who are in the know.
    And IF you put put a "BAD" product like Nids you dont go throwing good products under the bus for being to "GOOD".

    Thats like Coke changing the formula and people not liking it, Amd tjen saying the old recipies were just to good. And we are jacking up the prices because the "NEW" Coke is cooler. mean while you have no PR and just the clerks at the store or resturant being your mouth piece. GW maybe SHOULD do tournys so they at least have an idea how the game is being played and what players need.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not...A good comparison, Coke actually did that in 1985 by introducing "New Coke" to replace the original formula, people HATED it, then they introduced "Coke Classic" to replace it, the changes? It was the original formula with the sugar replaced by corn syrup.

      Delete
  39. -They want to sell models based on coolness factor, not on price tag. Cited an example where they reduced the price of WHFB cavalry models to 25 bucks (from 45) and there was absolutely no change in volume.

    I'd like to see them half the points cost via errata on the same unit (dark elf cold ones iirc). I suspect that would sell bucket loads due to game balance. GW really need to figure out the sell models for gaming purpose, not just models that look cool. If they want to sell more equal numbers of all their models they need to make them equally useful in game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WHFB cavalry look like my Little poney horses.... whot the f+++ wants them???????

      If they'd redo the sculpt, and then switched it to 25, then they would have sold loads of them.

      Delete
    2. Many of the new sculpts no longer have the dreaded pony pose, but that was not the issue here. The cold one knights are the dark elves riding velociraptors and are one of the best cavalry sculpts gw do. In fact these often get bought for other armies and game systems for conversions.

      Delete
  40. Stupid knights, you mean if I had bought something I don't want something I do want would be cheaper. Why you no listen GW??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't want stuff every army can bring kind of kills the whole purpose of having specialized armies. Next thing we know Codex of the Imperium is going to come out and You'll be bale to bring everything from a Guardsman, SOB, SM, and anything else. If what this GW Rep said is true in the long run I'm sad to say GW is taking a path I'm uncomfortable with, then again it might not be so bad, but only time will tell.

      Delete
  41. No it's not the prices that hold me back it the lack of people I can play with now they have got sick of the same thing being recycled as new for twice the price and their armies being shit after the new codex comes out. We don't want competitive gains we just don't want to know who Will win before we start! Sorry silly iPads not working properly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah I'v had a few games against NIDs, New Eldar, New Tau, and Demons where I just looked at my opponent after they showed me what they were bringing to the fight shook their hand and said good game with a smile. We still played sometimes it was fun/annoying but the outcome was already known.

      Delete
  42. Balance Gone.... Yup and therefore game isn't a game, it is a interactive modeling experience. Was it to hard to play the 15 armies against each other? Maybe a few less NEW units and just clean up range balance units and if army only rules they are very fluffy. All troop choices should be only a rule or stay difference, not your troops are my elites. Think of what made the armies different in 3rd. Marines had nine armored options in 3rd. Now they have 21.

    ReplyDelete
  43. If GW has no interest in balance, why have game designers? Just get the sculptors to come up with the rules to go with each model they do.

    I really hope this bit of information is just a troll, but I think it's SOP for GW.

    ReplyDelete
  44. After fourth came out took off a edition didn't like changes, got geeked about sixth edition loved rules everything seemed good first two codexs weren't overpowered then came dataslates, supplements, mini codexs, white dwarf became a advertisement, and every army got bigger old builds didn't even play anymore. My death wing is still pewter was 1500 points now 1000 points, maybe get back to armies with six or so units, guard/orks are fielding 200 models. Remember when codexs had advice on how to build terrain this is a hobby but if painting toy soilders is all it's about there are nice new games that really like my money

    ReplyDelete
  45. "-They want to sell models based on coolness factor, not on price tag. Cited an example where they reduced the price of WHFB cavalry models to 25 bucks (from 45) and there was absolutely no change in volume."

    So...there were many issues of White Dwarf where they had a whole page of Cavalry box pics with the big $45 price tag slashed through followed by a "New low price: $25!" in its place? I must have somehow missed this supposedly failed grand experiment in price reduction that is being spoken of...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah They are doing the them, them, them excuse. Blaming the consumers for something GW failed to advertise or make people aware of. Probably would help if they had a *Cough* PR department or at least interacted with the community.....

      Delete
  46. Now I was looking on the GW website and noticed that some deals are starting to pop up starting with Nids. examples the normal inf broods for 10 models its $29, but for 20 its $44 you save $14 on that deal. Then there's the 95 model deal for $170. i did the math the best I could and for $170 you get roughly $314.75 worth of models. The math got a little iffy on the ripper swarms but thats assuming you only get 1 swarm per pack. So if they do bulk deals I'm going to suck in my pride and say good job GW. It still will be hard for new players to afford unless they save their money for a while to buy one of these bulk deals but it does seem worth it with the current prices. http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440294a&prodId=prod2340100a

    ReplyDelete
  47. "$200" start up? So who at GW can't add? $100 rulebook, $50 codex and you expect to get an HQ and 2 troops for $50? Its coming from them so they are only thinking full retail. Aside from dark vengeance thats not possible so unless you're starting CSM expect the start up to be more like $300-$350 for something decently playable.

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...