|
Post by historygamer2 on May 24, 2007 5:37:29 GMT -5
FNH brought up a great specific subject on the Paper Activities discussion that I feel warrants it's own thread.
"If Games Workshop allowed people to produce Paper Mini's of thier products you would see a massive boom in 40K paper minis across the world. It would probably only end, once all of the world's colour printer cartidges were used up."
FNH hits on several important topics with one statement.
I don't think this would work because of three reasons - Metal/plastic mini painters like that hobby, paper minis do not have the same social/economical clout and GW would never allow their use in tournaments since it would destroy their own industry.
But what do you think?
The original concept of paper minis has been mainly to provide figures that fill miniature ranges that current manufacturers are not providing. They also provide a cheap alternative to metal/plastic. Copyright issues not withstanding lets dissect this idea.
As long as paper mini makers create non- threatening (to copyright or conceptual theft of manufacturers) the industry should leave them alone. At least until the demand for paper minis rose higher than the demand for metal/plastic. At which time the industry could either convert (not going to happen) or go under.
Free minis in a small way, compete against pay for paper minis already but there has been no real bad blood YET since most mini designers give each other lee way and design different things.
Would a large manufacturer ever endorse paper minis of their own metal figs?
In GW's case, would they go as far to allow those same figs in tournaments (their sales hook)?
What is the true difference between gamer, miniature painter/collector, or paper creator/collector?
Assembling and painting things is a hobby in it's own. It's members enjoy making things and then showing them off. Can one show off paper figures without being mocked? Do they have the same consumer status ( bigger is better)?
Does a true gamer forego the whole (I'm better than you, look what I got) syndrome and use paper or metal since it doesn't matter?
|
|
|
Post by shaungamer on May 24, 2007 23:05:41 GMT -5
Would a large manufacturer ever endorse paper minis of their own metal figs? No, and they would be silly to do it!
In GW's case, would they go as far to allow those same figs in tournaments (their sales hook)? No, for the reasons you mention above
What is the true difference between gamer, miniature painter/collector, or paper creator/collector? Why I have turned from "miniature painter" to "paper creator" is I want to game more than I want to model. I think using paper gives you more time to play. However this isn't always the case, as using the GW example: the time to create a paper 40k army from scratch was almost the same as doing it normally.
Can one show off paper figures without being mocked? No, Not in this case, because there will always be someone who will think of them as a substitute. Rightly so I might add.
Do they have the same consumer status ( bigger is better)? No, Again because they are a substitute
Does a true gamer forego the whole (I'm better than you, look what I got) syndrome and use paper or metal since it doesn't matter? Yes! I think I can answer this one fairly honestly. A true gamer doesn't care so long as he plays the game. I am lucky enough to know some of the best 40k players in Australia. They have won national tournaments and played against the best in the country. One of my funniest memories was seeing two of them play a game of 40k with soup cans and odds and ends. They didn't care about the figures, they cared about the game. So to a true gamer, it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by FNH on May 25, 2007 2:39:37 GMT -5
"What is the true difference between gamer, miniature painter/collector, or paper creator/collector?"
Gamer, likes toplay games.
Painter/Collector likes to paint, likes the "feel" of metal minis and hasn't heard of Paper Minis except in derogatory terms and so is likely to also refer to them in derogatory term.
Paper Creator/Collector, likes to Play, likes small storage requirements.
|
|
|
Post by historygamer2 on Jun 4, 2007 8:02:46 GMT -5
The real thing vs paper!
One thing being overlooked is the ability to sell/resell/trade your metal/plastic whether painted or unpainted at game conventions or on ebay. Something that can't be done with paper as effectively.
Many suppliment their income by selling their painted high standard work. Others create/paint terrain for sale. I have only seen one paper model maker selling at a convention. 20mm stuff preprinted and packaged. I have yet to see a game table set up with the same paper models however.
Now while the industry standard of collectable miniature games overwhelms everything, it renders unpainted/unassembled metal/plastic at a disadvantage to say nothing of how it impacts the paper mini/model user.
Have collectable mini's doomed the traditional miniature figure business?
Here are a several I am aware of: Heroclix, MageKnight, Dungeons & Dragons, Axis & Allies, Mechwarior, Kreapy Freaks and Sports Clix.
Each has sponsored prize winning tournaments and a market to sell collect the figures for profit making, not necessarily even for gaming. So has the hobby been hijacked by profit seeking?
Everyone complains about GW changing their rules every couple of years. What I don't think most people realize is that the internet is mostly to blaim. When GW first published the rogue trader it was not so popular. Once they started running tournaments and got to the first editions a flood of battle bibles filled the internet. How does an industry involved in a print (rules) business protect their rights when there are always more unscrupulous individuals that will post copyrighted data even as you shut one down. Yep you guessed it, the only way would be to reissue the rules when the internet became to saturated. Divert the hobby to the miniatures and make them high priced. Internet users can't post minis! Or can they?
What part of blame do us paper mini designers share for the animosity vs GW?
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Jun 5, 2007 1:51:39 GMT -5
What part of blame do us paper mini designers share for the animosity vs GW? Well, none actually. 8-)
|
|
|
Post by brynbrenainn on Jun 5, 2007 3:50:52 GMT -5
I agree. None.
|
|
|
Post by mahotsukai on Jun 5, 2007 18:54:28 GMT -5
What is mostly to blame, is that a company set up by two guys to import and sell the new D&D from America. Became so fantastically successful that both decided to sell up for a great deal of money. The new owner wanted to continue this success and sell his own product, and so we got the merger between GW and Citadel. Then the company was floated on the stock exchange and big business took note. the company was bought as a business by the next owners, and as a business they want to make profit. They make profit by selling miniatures. Anyone who remembers the heyday of GW in the mid Eighties will remember a 'games shop'. We sold all kinds of stuff anything from RPG's to Board Games to miniatures and not just Citadel we had Ral Partha & Grenadier also. Look at GW today you have a dedicated profit machine. All those fun GW board games gone. Board games don't sell miniatures. Warhammer RPG gone. Rpg's don't sell miniatures. Anything made by anybody else gone. if you make it yourself you don't have to pay the manufacters mark up.
Everyone complains about GW changing their rules every couple of years. What I don't think most people realize is that the internet is mostly to blaim. When GW first published the rogue trader it was not so popular. Once they started running tournaments and got to the first editions a flood of battle bibles filled the internet. How does an industry involved in a print (rules) business protect their rights when there are always more unscrupulous individuals that will post copyrighted data even as you shut one down. Yep you guessed it, the only way would be to reissue the rules when the internet became to saturated. Divert the hobby to the miniatures and make them high priced. Internet users can't post minis! Or can they?
Unfortunately HistoryGamer you have it backwards the proliferation of internet rules support is a reaction to GW dropping popular rule sets in favour of 'New' and 'Improved' Rule sets.
GW is not a print business. The rules are a means to an end and the end is to sell miniatures. Why do you think they bring out the army books seperately?
Johnny buys Elf book 'cos Elves kick ass'. buys lots of Elves for army. New Dwarf book comes out, now Dwarves have better stats than Elves and Johnny's army keeps losing. Johnny buys Dwarf book and Dwarf army, until next book comes out. Continue until all races have been covered. Then we have a rules revision and the cycle continues. However you cannot use the miniatures from the previous cycle as there are significant differences between the last edition and the new one.
The miniatures are where the profits are. It was with the white metal miniatures, and is now especially with the new plastic ranges. Whenthey first came out with the plastics in the eighties, I was told by an area manager that it cost £10,000 to cut a mould for a plastic sprue, as they were cut in stainless steel by specialists. Take that cost (ball park figure) and divide it by £20 (the cost in UK for a box of plastic) that is 500 units needed to be sold to offset the costs, divide that by the number of outlets to quote GW:
Products are sold through our own chain of 250 + Hobby Centers and by more than 3,500 independent toy and hobby shops around the world. These outlets are complemented by our growing mail order and online sales businesses
That means that each GW hobby centre has only got to sell more than 2 units to go into profit.
You may have noticed I said 'we sold'. When I joined GW in 1982 there were 4 (four) shops I left in 1994 by which time the 'Globalisation of GW' had happened with shops in the US, Europe, and Australia.
What part of blame do us paper mini designers share for the animosity vs GW?
Absolutely none at all. The animosity has been generated by GW's drive for profits and has been manifesting since at least the early nineties when popular rules sets and armies were replaced.
Larry
|
|
|
Post by brynbrenainn on Jun 6, 2007 10:36:06 GMT -5
Thank you for putting it all in words. I agree with it all, and remember most of it from early White Dwarfs and friends in the business. That is exactly the way I understand and remember the history of GW; But I could never in my life put it in words like this. I was about to post: 'We have nothing to blame, GW have themselves to blame.'But that would sound very obnoxious without your explanation...
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on Jun 6, 2007 17:49:23 GMT -5
I was about to post: 'We have nothing to blame, GW have themselves to blame.'But that would sound very obnoxious without your explanation... Not obnoxious, very, very true. I use to manage a line of games stores and GW's pricing structure was capricious, their regulations for distribution were obnoxious, and their publicly stated rationale behind many of their decisions came off as almost farcical exaggerations of the truth. The price of your plastics is going up because there's a tin shortage? Anyways, who needs 'em?
|
|