shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 9, 2020 16:35:42 GMT
Every time you harp about cost, I ask the same question, and never get a meaningful response:
So, what's your point? Is a game somehow intrinsically more fun to play because it costs less? GW is roughly 20 times larger than Privateer, and they can sometimes -- but hardly always! -- make some products that cost less.
So? How is this remotely meaningful?
It's meaningful in that, if I'm correctly remembering what my old economics teacher told me twenty years ago, demand is inversely proportional to price. So if PP's starter products are more expensive than popular alternatives, they will achieve less market penetration, meaning it will be harder to find people to play with and/or harder to convince your friends to buy into the game. Also we might just be at the start of a massive economic depression; for some people money is tight right now, and might get worse. Personally I've been paid half my actual salary for the last three months. I mean, like I said I still went in on Riot Quest and I have zero interest in Underworlds, but that's because I want Riot Quest (for the reasons I mentioned above) and I don't want Underworlds - and also because I'm not very financially responsible - so I understand your point Micheal, but that doesn't mean the price isn't meaningful. pretty much. not everyone has a lot of free cash to throw at hobbies. yes, miniature gaming is a niche luxury product, but if you can get a game experience for just 20-30 bucks most people will go for it. just like Soul says, part of the reason GW's product is so much more popular is that it's more accessible, both because it's an industry juggernaut but also because the product is just cheaper. And I'm gonna be totally honest, there are people like me who want to get as many minis as possible for their money. And at the skirmish level GW is the choice there.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 9, 2020 17:07:34 GMT
Every time you harp about cost, I ask the same question, and never get a meaningful response:
So, what's your point? Is a game somehow intrinsically more fun to play because it costs less? GW is roughly 20 times larger than Privateer, and they can sometimes -- but hardly always! -- make some products that cost less.
So? How is this remotely meaningful?
It's meaningful in that, if I'm correctly remembering what my old economics teacher told me twenty years ago, demand is inversely proportional to price. So if PP's starter products are more expensive than popular alternatives, they will achieve less market penetration, meaning it will be harder to find people to play with and/or harder to convince your friends to buy into the game. Also we might just be at the start of a massive economic depression; for some people money is tight right now, and might get worse. Personally I've been paid half my actual salary for the last three months. I mean, like I said I still went in on Riot Quest and I have zero interest in Underworlds, but that's because I want Riot Quest (for the reasons I mentioned above) and I don't want Underworlds - and also because I'm not very financially responsible - so I understand your point Micheal, but that doesn't mean the price isn't meaningful. Well, that's just it -- price isn't the sole factor to consider. Economics is hardly as simple as that old "inversely proportional" graph.
Apple can sell their latest iPhone for $1. GW could roll up to my door with a dumptruck full of Space Marines and tell me they're mine for $1. That doesn't mean I have any interest at all in owning those items.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 9, 2020 19:38:29 GMT
stats are up for several RQ models on WM Uni. Any idea where they found them? are there stats for all new RQ models and the new theme?
|
|
sorokin
Junior Strategist
Posts: 775
|
Post by sorokin on Jul 9, 2020 21:34:48 GMT
stats are up for several RQ models on WM Uni. Any idea where they found them? are there stats for all new RQ models and the new theme? Spoilers in the Facebook groups for 3 of the new models. Yssylla's rules were also completely spoiled on the recent The Meta podcast but none of us editors could be arsed to give her a page yet. That's work, man.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 9, 2020 22:44:19 GMT
stats are up for several RQ models on WM Uni. Any idea where they found them? are there stats for all new RQ models and the new theme? Spoilers in the Facebook groups for 3 of the new models. Yssylla's rules were also completely spoiled on the recent The Meta podcast but none of us editors could be arsed to give her a page yet. That's work, man. you say that like anyone on god's green earth cares about her
|
|
sorokin
Junior Strategist
Posts: 775
|
Post by sorokin on Jul 9, 2020 22:56:17 GMT
Spoilers in the Facebook groups for 3 of the new models. Yssylla's rules were also completely spoiled on the recent The Meta podcast but none of us editors could be arsed to give her a page yet. That's work, man. you say that like anyone on god's green earth cares about her Oh i am sure there are some legion fans, it's not like dorfs who have like 3 die hard players total globally. Probably not among the editors though.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 9, 2020 22:59:34 GMT
you say that like anyone on god's green earth cares about her Oh i am sure there are some legion fans, it's not like dorfs who have like 3 die hard players total globally. Probably not among the editors though. There are no Legion fans in Lormahordes.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jul 10, 2020 8:51:14 GMT
Well, that's just it -- price isn't the sole factor to consider. Economics is hardly as simple as that old "inversely proportional" graph.
Apple can sell their latest iPhone for $1. GW could roll up to my door with a dumptruck full of Space Marines and tell me they're mine for $1. That doesn't mean I have any interest at all in owning those items. While price isn't the sole factor to consider, when products look like they are comparable, their price may be a deciding factor. If you consider model quality PP is doing well, but not the best. And then, there are the rules. From what I heard RQ is more of a crazy, random fun affair, not really about mind-wracking gameplay. But I decided to impersonate someone who doesn't know much about the skirmish boardgame market and does a little research online. BGG is an obvious place to do that.
(game names are links) RIOT QUEST - has an average score of 7,2, but more importantly 17 voters, which speaks volume of its popularity. WH:U BEASTGRAVE - is more difficult to rate, as every edition (Shadespire, Nightvault) is rated individually on BGG. For example Beastgrave, the newest, has an average score of 8,4, but only 245 voters, while Shadespire -by many treated as the name of the entire WH:U product line - 7,8 rating, 2345 voters BLACK ROSE WARS - is a skirmish board game I own and it is A LOT of value (100+ miniatures, including huge monsters, uncountable stuff) for just 139$. But you know, Kickstarter, you expect to get more bang for your buck with those, don't you ? This game has a score of 8,2, rated by 1200 gamers
So yes, price is indeed not a sole factor. PP is apparently trying to push a disgustingly inflated price for a game which is arguably not only slightly worse, but also (as a result of being stupidly expensive and not really better than the competition) hardly played by anyone.
Which leads me to believe that they are not really trying to win the market with something they consider a hit. They create too many barriers for that. I feel they just want to feed on loyal "whales" in their existing fanbase, maybe just to survive. (please note, it's a feeling, not a professional economic analysis )
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Jul 10, 2020 9:04:58 GMT
Cyel the $225 is the non-early bird "full deal", therein you get the starter, so you can actually play the game and 16 models that are fully compatible with 2 games (WMH and RQ). That's 14 dollars per model, if you ignore the rest of the value you get in the box, which also contains (admittedly rather vague) loot tokens to buy extra stuff with after the Kickstarter goes through. Modelwise I would say that's already decent value and you get a new board game to go with it, essentially for free. I'm not saying this is really cheap and the best deal of the century, but it's a still a (slightly) better deal per model of what we've come to expect of high quality unique models for a tabletop game. You also decided to jump on the highest level; if people just want to wet their toes and try a new game, there is nothing stopping them from pledging at the $50 level and buying an individual model that they actually want here and there.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jul 10, 2020 10:39:40 GMT
That is fair! But isn't the minimum cost of the simplest 2-player experience actually 100$, because you can't play with just one box (honestly don't know, I remember it works like that but may be mistaken). Also, can't a core set + 11 warbands for WH:U kind of considered an all-in too ? That's what I was using as comparison.
Core set for 100$ still is a lot for me, personally, when I want to compare and choose between this and other alternatives I have mentioned. WH:U starter is for 2-players, while BRW may be played by 4 just with the core set (35 miniatures and a ton of stuff, not counting the negligible ~60 other miniatures you get from stretch goals)
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 10, 2020 11:12:09 GMT
That is fair! But isn't the minimum cost of the simplest 2-player experience actually 100$, because you can't play with just one box (honestly don't know, I remember it works like that but may be mistaken). Also, can't a core set + 11 warbands for WH:U kind of considered an all-in too ? That's what I was using as comparison. Core set for 100$ still is a lot for me, personally, when I want to compare and choose between this and other alternatives I have mentioned. WH:U starter is for 2-players, while BRW may be played by 4 just with the core set (35 miniatures and a ton of stuff, not counting the negligible ~60 other miniatures you get from stretch goals) yes, if you want to own a full playable module of the game you're going to need to shell over the full hundred (minimum). For $60-ish you can get the 2 player nightvault starter set, which contains 10 minis, and I've seen firsthand that GW's new plastics are great (although they're a bit too weightless for my taste). Or if you want something on a slightly bigger scale, 100$ will get you somewhere between 16-20 miniatures for Warcry, split between two warbands.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Jul 10, 2020 13:35:31 GMT
That is fair! But isn't the minimum cost of the simplest 2-player experience actually 100$, because you can't play with just one box (honestly don't know, I remember it works like that but may be mistaken). Also, can't a core set + 11 warbands for WH:U kind of considered an all-in too ? That's what I was using as comparison. Not necessarily, you only need 1 map and set of dice, though it is definitely convenient to have at least a set of dice for everyone. If one person has a starter set, the other(s) can join in by simply bringing some random (compatible) models they own. Your point is valid, because the expected/preferred path is indeed that everyone owns their own set (for the dice if nothing else), but it is not strictly required.
|
|
shmeep
Junior Strategist
Posts: 742
|
Post by shmeep on Jul 10, 2020 14:03:52 GMT
That is fair! But isn't the minimum cost of the simplest 2-player experience actually 100$, because you can't play with just one box (honestly don't know, I remember it works like that but may be mistaken). Also, can't a core set + 11 warbands for WH:U kind of considered an all-in too ? That's what I was using as comparison. Not necessarily, you only need 1 map and set of dice, though it is definitely convenient to have at least a set of dice for everyone. If one person has a starter set, the other(s) can join in by simply bringing some random (compatible) models they own. Your point is valid, because the expected/preferred path is indeed that everyone owns their own set (for the dice if nothing else), but it is not strictly required. even if you can share the set with someone that's still around 45$+55-65$. and what if you want to draw in new players? it's not ideal.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jul 10, 2020 14:05:48 GMT
... PP is apparently trying to push a disgustingly inflated price for a game which is arguably not only slightly worse, but also (as a result of being stupidly expensive and not really better than the competition) hardly played by anyone. ... It is authoritative, declarative “opinions-as-fact” statements like this that make me question the legitimacy of your arguments.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jul 10, 2020 14:23:22 GMT
... PP is apparently trying to push a disgustingly inflated price for a game which is arguably not only slightly worse, but also (as a result of being stupidly expensive and not really better than the competition) hardly played by anyone. ... It is authoritative, declarative “opinions-as-fact” statements like this that make me question the legitimacy of your arguments. I am just using BGG stats and prices for comparison. It's just numbers, hard to argue about them. What stats do you use ?
|
|