Reply To: If you were in charge of GW now

[cornishleeParticipant 205xp 1]

Would never happen,

Simply not going to happen.

Opening with this almost feels like you’re telling me I’m wrong, when I made a point of beginning my post with saying exactly the same thing in order to head off such unnecessary arguments.

I’m going to start this by stating that this isn’t a prediction of anything I think will happen, in fact I don’t think it will happen.

That said, you have both made some interesting points. I’m particularly interested in this section:

Licensing out WHFB as a table top game would not be in GW’s interest. The revenue from such a niche product would be minimal while it would be sending out very mixed messages as to what GW is about and doing. Licensing out games or miniatures is one thing, but not games with miniatures like this. It would also be difficult not too see it as taking sales away from AoS – even if just a very small fraction. GW has already diversified its games and arguably runs the risk of over saturating its costumers anyway.

The revenue may be small, I don’t know. As I said though, if I was in charge I’d look at it and make a decision on that basis. As for mixed messages, I don’t see it as any more mixed than allowing the world to continue outside of tabletop miniatures games. Suddenly, the world is not dead, like we’d been led to believe, but alive and well. I’m also unclear by what you mean about GW having diversified its games and I’d love to know more. To my knowledge, they have 40k, AoS, occasional skirmish games set in those worlds (which use the same models so don’t really detract from them) and occasional boardgames set in the same world (currently WQ: Blackstone Fortress) which is similar to what they had in the early 2000’s (and arguably smaller in scope than what they had before that). Oddly, of course, they also have a relaunched Blood Bowl, which itself is set in the Warhammer world.