First impressions vs sustainability. Are looks more important than rules?

[sundancer]

So I was watching YouTube (as you do during your break) and took a look at Zorpazorps current video on MESBG. In that video he pointed out how very happy he is because of new plastic minis for said game.

Fair enough.

But then he went on to say that a game needs fresh minis to be sustainable and be long lived. Quote:

New players join the community, drawn in by their love of LotR, take one look at the 20 year old sculpts […] and we never see them again

That’s at the 2:55 mark of the video (Link at the end)

Now that made me think. Are new, shiny minis really necessary to keep a game running for years and years? Let’s have a look at three examples I have some experience with or insight on.

Battletech – has been running for decades, rules basically unchanged and new minis are really only popping out since CGL did a visual refresh right at the time when the turn based video game was released. Before that everybody had the same metal minis.

Battle for Middle Earth SG – As far as I know rules have been the same (more or less) since day 1 and minis are all made by GW. There are 3rd party minis that are way older but in general official LotR minis are GW. Everything else is legally distinct different stuff.

Blood Bowl – again, rules (more or less) unchanged for the last 20+ years BUT you get minis everywhere and from multiple makers and sculptors. Resin, Siocast, metal, PVC and 3D printing. Fill your boots!

This comes to me as a 2:1 in favour of “rules/systems make a game” vs “new minis keep it alive!”

But then there is W’hamster 40, changing rules every other year (feels like it) but also pumps out new minis all the time. And is the market leader.

So are minis keeping the game alive?

My conclusion: Rules/systems keep a game running. Minis keep an IP alive. So in theory a good set of rules with a constant flow of minis should be a money printing machine. And I think (to a degree) Blood Bowl does that. Only that all the cash doesn’t flow into GW pockets but is spread between them and all 3rd party miniature makers.

Your opinion?

The video:

• This topic was modified 1 year ago by sundancer. Reason: Forgot the video link

[grantinvanman 6667xp 1]

First of all, cool username – straight outta Rick & Morty; I dig that.

Second, I think good rules are important, but cool toys are importanter. People will buy new minis without rules, just because they look awesome. That will drag them into the game, maybe. Very few people will buy a big old book of rules and think, DANG, can’t wait to read this tome of terms. Unless it’s a universe they love, and nostalgia is there. Something like that.

[limburger 22101xp 1]

(1) I think it depends on the quality of the mini design.

If the materials and skill were lacking then an upgraded/tweaked fresh mini is what the doctor ordered.

But new minis just so the box can say ‘new minis’ ?
That’s just wrong.

The real problem is that with the absolutely massive wave of ‘new’ releases it is easy for things to get lost.
Who will remember MESBG when GW launches an equally massive ‘update’ for their main line games ?

If anything GW is its own worst enemy in this.

They are the ones flooding their own market with ‘new’ things and ‘must have updates/expansions’

The one game that could have been a ‘one and done’ deal got hit with the same insane post launch crap shoot that taints the rest of their catalog.

(2) ideally we want a range of choices. When everything is ‘good’ nothing is bad either. Folk need to find their own ideal ratio of looks vs quality.

Can’t we accept that not everyone needs the ‘best of the best’ ? Some of us don’t mind the ‘crappy’ rules when they’re having fun playing a game with cool minis and friends.

I get that we as geeks dream about the ‘perfect’ system, but ‘perfect’ is the enemy of ‘good (enough)’.

You see the same thing in the entertainment industry where the enthusiasts will whine about the ‘average’ movies and songs while the vast majority is perfectly happy with the rather average low effort crap the studios and artists produce.

You can never tell someone they are having ‘wrong fun’ because they dared to like something from someone who isn’t at the top of the field in every aspect.

(3) clickbait is clickbait
Videos like that are not designed to answer questions.
They’re designed to force interaction by having folk post how much he is wrong about whatever he said, because that’s where he’s getting the money.

[onlyonepinman]

It depends on the business model of the company making the game.  Battletech has been around a long time, but how many owners has it had?  As long lived as it is,  I don’t think it’s really a good example of success.

If all you do is publish rules, as many historical companies do, then you need those rules to be excellent because they are your product.   Once you get into the fantasy realm, you find quite often the rules are the vehicle for selling miniatures and if you operate in that space, you need a constant stream of new miniatures in order for the game to survive.  The miniatures are the  bulk of the income that support the company that make them, no company,  no game.

If we want to put it into the context of Middle Earth Strategy Battle Game, I think it’s going to struggle purely because the game relies quite heavily on the films to support it.  The films reached peak popularity 20 years ago.   Modern cinema is really struggling which is going to restrict the number of films made and limit their impact on growth of the fanbase.  So as good as the MESBG range has been over the years,  it faces a highly uncertain future

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by onlyonepinman.

[sundancer 43745xp 0]

@limburger  You’re absolutely right about (3) but that was not the point. He does those titles all the time I just thought his statement about “game needs new minis to survive” interesting.

@grantinvanman you’re not wrong but does that keep a game alive? Or just the IP? I know I’m splitting hairs here but that’s the whole point of this discussion.

@onlyonepinman  good point on Battletech. Hadn’t thought about that. And you raise an interesting point: does the setting dictate the way you need to foster your game? Probably. There is some real overlap here. Historicals tend to focus more on the rules as you can’t copyright the design from 1582 or something. So *anybody* could do those minis. Thus when you invent a three legged hover tank that fires dwarves in a SciFi universe: claim those rights baby, who cares about game rules?

[grantinvanman 6667xp 0]

“you’re not wrong but does that keep a game alive? Or just the IP? I know I’m splitting hairs here but that’s the whole point of this discussion.“

 

I think it does keep a game alive; Blood Bowl is an example you stated. I agree that the wide variety of minis and teams – GW and many others – have kept that game alive when so many other Specialist Games died. Largely due to a rabid fan base, too, who kept the Living Rulebook concept going far longer than other systems. Jervis Johnson set the parameters, but how many games lived?

Alive:

Blood Bowl – fan base support is wide and intense

Necromunda – mostly a reboot by GW but has some of the nicest minis in GW land.

Epic – somewhat alive in the form of Legions Imperialis.

RIP:

Mordheim

Warmaster

Battlefleet Gothic

Man O War

Gorkamorka

and many others…

[sundancer 43745xp 1]

I disagree on Mordheim and Gorkamorka. Both still enjoy a fanbase and Mordheim even got a video game recently.

Edit: dismiss my argument, that Mordheim video game is 9 years old XD

[onlyonepinman 18109xp 0]

Battletech still has a fanbase (obviously) because people still keep buying the license.  But unless there is a supply of new miniatures,  it will struggle to grow.  Here’s how I think it probably works.

• A game is released, there are some miniatures.
• Game has an initial surge in popularity and players buy lots of miniatures.
• Sales slow a little as some players decide it’s not for them or the are happy with just the basics
• Once players have everything they need sales slow down even further.

At this point what does a company do to keep the game alive.  The only option they really have is new miniatures.  Ideally this would be entirely new miniatures,  or perhaps variants/alternatives of existing miniatures but unless they bring something new to the game, they may have limited appeal.  If the maker of the game cannot generate those sales the company will go under.  This doesn’t wipe the game or community away; people still have games and rules and can continue to play but how does one get new players in?  The only option would 3rd party proxies and not everyone is OK with that so community growth is now limited by lack of ongoing support.  Even if independent companies continue to make miniatures for the game (as happened with Battletech and RalPartha/Ironwind), publicity for the game will be limited, as is access to copies of the rules.   And so over time, the community itself will dwindle as the attrition rate will undoubtedly exceed the recruitment rate.

I think in order to survive a game has to have good rules and it has to have access to good* miniatures, whether produced by the rules writers or a 3rd party, in order to generate initial interest, retain players and recruit new ones and both the rules and miniatures need to be available all the time.

* Good is obviously subjective and I used it deliberately.  The miniatures need to be fit for purpose both in terms of their practicality and price.  If your game needs thousands of models, they need to be relatively cheap and easy to assemble.  If you need a handful of models you might consider more complex options.  So there is no single definition of “good” and much of will be driven by the needs of the game.

[pagan8th 13388xp 1]

Rules are more important to me… and by that I mean rules that are not replaced ever year with a new book.

GW is one of the worst for this with new edition making every book bought for the older edition obsolete.

I prefer miniature agnostic games like 7TV. You don’t need the Crooked Dice miniatures to play, but they make some of the best metals in my opinion and they stay in business through quality.

[limburger 22101xp 0]

But what do we consider ‘surviving’ ?
Not every game has the potential to be played by everyone.

A consistent audience of a thousand players is still an active game.

Not every game needs to hit an audience as big as 40k manages.

Chess is still an active game despite having the same old rules and minis for decades.
The core concepts are simply that good for a lot of players.

Xwing had a great launch, but it struggled getting good fresh content.
And IMHO it hit the wall early for a lot of folk as they didn’t have the need to play anything other than Xwings vs Tie-fighters with perhaps a sprinkling of iconic craft from the movies. I’d say it could have survived if the publisher had set a more realistic goal for the player counts that could keep the money flowing. The core game is still more than serviceable.

If ‘new minis’ are the only thing that keep the players happy then that game is doomed as sooner or later you will not have anything new to add. This kind of happened to Guildball as well. They simply ran out of design space for the various characters.
You can’t level up the old crews forever, because that would make any new crews too weak to compete.

Games need more than a constant flood of ‘new’ things to stay alive. They need to inspire players to invent their own things.
If all a game does is make them reach for their credit card … then what is there when the money runs out ?

[onlyonepinman]

A better word than “survive” would be “thrive”.  A game survives as long as a copy of the rules exist somewhere.   A game thrives with active and growing player communities.

I am also not suggesting rules are unimportant, in order for a game to survive and thrive, it needs both interesting/exciting rules and good miniatures available to play with.   If you are going down the route of supplying games and miniatures, then chances are the miniature sales are what keep the business alive, so you definitely have to keep making new products. Like I said, no miniature sales, no business, no game.

As for first impressions, there’s probably two routes in.  Either the miniatures catch your eye and you are hooked.  Or someone you know introduces you to the game with a demo.  These first impressions will also likely colour you views and motivations as well.

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by onlyonepinman.

[limburger 22101xp 1]

minis to get you into the door

rules to make you play

friends to make you stay

I know there’s folk out there who (claim that they) don’t care about looks, but I’d say they are either a minority or lying.

[onlyonepinman 18109xp 0]

I think what you are saying applies to fantasy games, but I don’t think it necessarily applies to historical wargames.  Or rather it manifests differently.

[grantinvanman 6667xp 0]

I think it works for a lot of historical games that have been successful in cracking the Warhammer code, such as Flames of War and more recently Bolt Action. They’ve got the game algorithm worked out. Churn, and churn again! Keep the newness going, even if they aren’t re-writing history, eh?

[limburger]

Historicals are a bit odd.

Altough even there I’d argue that cool minis can get someone in. Tanks are good for that bit. (anyone who hasn’t wanted a Tiger tank is not telling the truth 😛 )

Or maybe it is a ‘cool’ / ‘interesting’ battle ? Fantasy has lore/background, but those can be tricky to navigate without visual media as a reference.

(that’s why D-day is the usual ‘starter set’ for WW 2 rules : everyone understands what it was … )

//

I don’t understand the hatred/disdain for entry level (historical) games like Bolt action and Flames of war.
Yes, they’re not perfectly historical … but they get the job done for the people that play them.

Not everyone has the time or desire to do a deep dive into a game.
Beer&pretzel level of fun can be good enough for some.

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by limburger.

[Author]

Posts