The truth is, FFG only has this license for a limited time. So I imagine the smart business plan is exactly what they are doing. Releasing new games with the same general system and different fluff with some alternate style rules. Target it at the already existing audience and make as much money as possible until GW takes back the property they own and publish it themselves.

I couldnt imaging the contract lasting longer then say 5 or so years before it needing to be renegotiated or extended. So I think Black Crusade is the beginning of the "we are near the end of the contract" cycle. So yeah, I think we will see a new game line every year until the contract is renewed.

The first thing, I imagine, for the lines once a extension is granted, would be a universal core rule book.

Heck, at this point in time Id kill for a conversion book.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Yeah, sure, no problem with that (lol, not referring to your killing part here). But the "What about the gamers who only want to play a specific campaign that would not be part of the universal core rulebook? They'd need to buy two books" isn't convincing at all. FFG didn't choose this format to accomodate them.

Alex

Alex calm down and let the fanboys froth Everything has been already said, educated readers can make their own opinion, those who cant do simple math in this particular case are at their own loss. FFG is not going to react to the thread, anyway, and this argument is being pushed around longer than necessary.

tkis said:

Hey, I'm perfectly calm while I'm writing this, no worries. It's just that when I feel that I'm being kidded, I think it's a good idea to let people know what I make of that.

And as for FFG, I've said many times before that I wouldn't let anyone tell me how to run my business, so I'm not going to try to tell them how they should run theirs.

tkis said:

Yep, agreed.

Adam France said:

There's a market for more sourcebooks. Just not a great one. They are still releasing them, but the only sourcebooks left to release are pretty niche. The corebooks have all been released and the game is now old enough to be past its best years. It can't support a rapid release rate of supplements - the distributors simply won't buy them.

The distributors are, however, a lot more willing to buy multiple sourcebooks as long as they are for different lines. That's just the way the business works.

Adam France said:

Er, D&D has done just that. Yes, there are the monster manuals, which are designed to support the default play style. But they also released more specialised support for different settings. And the differences between most D&D games are a lot less that the difference between say DH and DW. The White Wolf lines are another example of split lines - Werewolf games need very different support than Vampire ones, so they get specialised supplements. Yes, those supplements can often be used for crossover, but there is a good reason why the different lines are very clearly seperated into seperate games.

macd21 said:

Yes and that's also the reason why FFG has produced multiple game lines for WFRP, allowing such diverse campaigns as playing an all Swordmaster of Hoeth group or the famous Witchhunter Core Rulebook for playing a cell of acolytes in the service of... oh, wait. They didn't do any of that.

Anyway, your claim about distributors is not verifiable by me. I take it with a grain of salt. Also, I have to not that 'more willing' doesn't imply rigidly unwilling.

macd21 said:

Forgotten Realms holds as much variety as the world of 40K. They could have released an epic level core rulebook for an all-Paladin campaign.
How many core rulebooks/game lines are there in D&D 4E anyway? I am not up-to-date, I am afraid.

macd21 said:

Please name them so we can verify whether they are good reasons indeed.

Alex

Quick question for everyone here: do you know everything that goes on at FFG, and everything that goes on between FFG and GW? Are you privy to information not released to the general public that might inform decisions regarding what games and supplements FFG choose to produce?

No? Didn't think so. I'm not either, nor would I expect to be... that sort of thing isn't my problem nor my responsibility.

Consequently, everything stated within this thread is nothing more than speculation made without all the information, mixed with the kind of "everyone but me is an idiot" posturing that gives internet discussions amongst fan-communities a bad name.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

That's true as far as it goes (for both sides of the discussion) ... but you imply it invalidates ALL points made. It doesn't. It just means we can't know for sure who in fact is right. As is almost always the case in any internet discussion.

ak-73 said:

You mean aside from making you think that I work for FFG? Cause from all appearances, I've fooled you about that. And I got a good laugh out of it too.

tkis said:

Alex calm down and let the fanboys froth Everything has been already said, educated readers can make their own opinion, those who cant do simple math in this particular case are at their own loss. FFG is not going to react to the thread, anyway, and this argument is being pushed around longer than necessary.

Afterall, why argue when you can just be passive aggressive and condescending?

The fact of the matter is, despite all the statements made to the contrary by some folks in this thread, there's no proof that everything being build on top of DH would have been a vastly superior game. While an arguement could be made for Rogue Trader using Dark Heresy homeworlds, Careers, and equipment, I don't think the same could be said for Deathwatch, where what Chapter you're inducted in to matters a whole lot more than what pisshole Imperial planet you were born on (and in the case of many Chapters, everyone would be from the same planet anyway), not to mention careers and equipment (though I'm sure some would be happy to see them stuck with mortal boltguns). Either we'd need to have little weedy marines, their sourcebook would have to contain rules for playing such high level characters (which eats up space that could be used for other stuff, and that has been one of the big complaints consistently levelled by you guys), or someone would need to buy Ascension as well as Deathwatch.

With this "build it all off DH" idea of yours, and the apparent need for people to buy multiple additional sourcebooks, above and beyond the much touted single one that covered everything DH didn't, how the hell are we getting gouged for money we otherwise wouldn't?

For Black Crusade I think it's much the same as Deathwatch. While you can have your cultist come from an Imperial World, or Hiveworld, it doesn't really fit well, you're back to pounding square blocks through round holes. While we know that the careers are going to be different enough that you'll be able to play with Chaos Marines, so there's that to factor in.

ak-73 said:

A big knowledgable gamer like you claim to be should know that the vast majority of supplements for the New World of Darkness are pretty splat specific. The only location book that isn't is Chicago, because it was specifically built with accomidating Vampires, Werewolves, and Mages. There are only about 22 books that are good for being used accross all the game lines, and 3 of them are only good for the antagonists they can provide (premade vampires, werewolves, and changelings, of various power levels and backgrounds). So basically 20. Vampire alone has many more, while there are roughly 25 each for Werewolf and Mage. When you add in the roughly 10 each that Changeling, Promethean, Hunter, and Geist have, the cross-game material is in a pretty small minority. About 22 books out of 150.

It's even more true for the classic WoD, where cross-mechanic compatability was not built in to the system. Again, it was pretty much the #2 game company after D&D for years, and they were using a system more like what FFG is now.

Blood Pact said:

People who are quick to lol at other posters are dime-a-dozen on the internet and they are usually not the most social of fellows either. In this case the joke is on you though, I suggest you brush up your reading skills:

"What I consider as insulting is the attempt to sell one for a sucker by some posters here and what aggrivates it is that it comes across as if their views are actually the FFG company line."

I had even made it in bold font, it apparently still wasn't good enough for some to catch the meaning of what I had said. Perhaps you can get it the second time around - but don't worry, I don't get a kick out of laughing about other people's perceived errors or short-comings. It's what gives internet debates a bad name.

Blood Pact said:

tkis said:

Alex calm down and let the fanboys froth Everything has been already said, educated readers can make their own opinion, those who cant do simple math in this particular case are at their own loss. FFG is not going to react to the thread, anyway, and this argument is being pushed around longer than necessary.

Afterall, why argue when you can just be passive aggressive and condescending?

Funny that you of all posters should say that. The nerve.

Blood Pact said:

Doesn't follow. The page count needed to make Space Marines "epic level" isn't that significant and is very well the material for a sourcebook.

Blood Pact said:

? What does that have to do with the issue? The Character Background Generation is just a fairly small section and for a Marine or Chaos Marine campaign you can use a custom section on a hypothetical sourcebook.

Blood Pact said:

"Afterall, why argue when you can just be passive aggressive and condescending?"

I didn't say I had expert knowledge in every role-playing system ever published though. But go ahead.

Blood Pact said:

"Afterall, why argue when you can just be passive aggressive and condescending?"

Okay, let me repeat what I have said for you:
"Please name them so we can verify whether they are good reasons indeed."

Note that you have failed to produce any reason. What you have done is give an overview of what the #2 game company (apparently that should give credibility) has been doing. In short: I see no argument provided be you here, only you being passive aggressive and condescending. Not for the first time, I might add.

And in fact your post serves to bolster my argument: They have been the #2 in business for years - it's all about business success, not primarily about accomodating the customer, right?

N0-1_H3r3 said:

No, instead arguments have been brought forth why posters here are not appreciative of the FFG approach and why they think (and I will give you that - that part is speculation) FFG/GW have chosen this approach. You can call it educated guessing by people who have been in the hobby for decades. And personally I have been considering the debate okay up until Blood Pact here.

You'll have to live with some gamers considering the motivation of FFG/GW to be pretty much in evidence. And you'll have to live with the fact that if you tell these people that it's all different and FFG/GW in truth have the customer first and foremostly in mind, that these people will consider you trying to feed them nonsense. And you will not sway them otherwise by claiming that these other people can't lead an adult internet discussion. If you'd try to sell someone Lehman Bros certificates today, you wouldn't get a positive reaction from them either. I don't understand why people just can't say "It's a business decision. FFG does what they think is best for business."

Arguments have been brought forth by me and others, you have not addressing the arguments but instead made a remark about the perceived posturing of other people. And I don't think this behaviour of yours is well-suited to improve the perception of internet debates among gaming circles, to be honest.

Alex

ak-73 said:

Sales for WFRP 3 outstrip those for the entirety of the 40k games, so there is less need to split the line to generate more sales. There is also the question of whether there would be a market for it. There is a clear market for the seperate 40k lines - some people want to play Space Marines, others acolytes. There may not be a market for more niche WFRP products. On the other hand, when WFRP sales fall they might release another version of the game, allowing players to be followes of chaos or the like. That would probably be dependant on permission from GW, however.

macd21 said:

As I understood it, the 40K games were FFGs big seller not WFRP 3E. Where are you getting your info so I can see it as well?

Peacekeeper_b said:

ICv2. It's an industry magazine that compiles data on pop culture trade tendencies. They aren't a perfect resource (they don't hae 100% of the data), but they are a respected voice in the industry. They don't have anything like exact sales figures, but they can usually identify trends and give a rough idea as to how well a game is doing.

Every quarter they release a list of the top 5 games in the RPG industry. IIRC WFRP 3 has been in 3rd place since its release (after D&D and PF). They treat the 40k games as a single line for sales purposes and they're usually in 4th or 5th place every quarter.

Latest report (Q3 2010) here:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/18504.html

It'll be interesting to see what the Q4 report says, as the release of DW should provide a significant boost to the 40k sales.

macd21 said:

Yeah but you said about DH:

"There's a market for more sourcebooks. Just not a great one. They are still releasing them, but the only sourcebooks left to release are pretty niche. The corebooks have all been released and the game is now old enough to be past its best years."

It doesn't sound like WFRP isn't past its best years saleswise, tbh, that's the point. And it's much much older than DH. So why should DH necessarily have its best years behind it?
I am not sure if D&D has its best years behind it either.

Branding is important. When FFG does a second edition, I hope they build a strong brand out of the various competing 40k RP systems.

What I was trying to say above was: WFRP is an old game, even if in a new edition. Still there is no multiple core rulebooks for it, there is supplements coming out for it, it's still supported and according to you it is successful.

I fail to see why publishing one rulebook for 40K RP and putting everything else out as campaign books should have failed as a strategy. Of course you have to design the campaign books so that it contains lots of interesting materials for running any of the other campaigns, that goes without saying.

Alex

Yes yes, I'm being rude too.

But I was quite content to discuss this topic politely and civilly...

And then a bunch of people marched in and started shouting about how we're all being cheated, and that this is bull, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot and working for the FFG PR department.

And suddenly, for some reason I just can't place my finger on, I decided civility was not the way anymore.

macd21 said:

What's more interesting is that Paizo are now tieing for first place with WOTC's 4e!!! Amazing and brilliant news imo.

ak-73 said:

No, WFRP is a newer game than DH. It may have had previous editions, but that doesn't really matter. What matters is that WFRP is still selling 'core' material and is still in the golden period when the initial purchasers are still interested in (and buying) the game (this usually lasts about 2 years after the initial release). The vast majority of game's sales comes from the initial release period, it quickly goes down from there.

D&D 4eds best years are indeed past. WotC have been making some efforts to reinvigorate the line (such as Essentials), but they don't seem to have had much success yet.

ak-73 said:

Couple of reasons. First is that they would miss out on the 'new' factor. A new game attracts more players than a new supplement does. Releasing DW as a supplement to DH would not have been nearly as successful. It's weird, but that's just the way the market works.

Second, by releasing a new game they get to reset the supplement treadmill. Each book released for a game tends to be worth less than the previous one. Instead of a supplement being the 20th book released for DH it can be the 2nd released for DW. Again, it's weird, but it makes a huge difference to the sales of a product.

There are other reasons, but I'm half asleep, so I'll leave them to someone else to fill in.

WFRP, as I mentioned, is a new game. Within a year or two its sales will start to dwindle, just as DH's have. FFG may try to boost sales somehow (WFRP 3.5 edition, WFRP: Black Crusade, or simply just the same game in a new corebox with different careers or the like), but they may be somewhat limited by the licence.

Warhammer 3E is only slightly newer than Dark Heresy. I find it interesting that released to date:

WFRP 3E - 15 products
DH - 12 products
RT - 6 products
DW - 4 products

40kRPG - 22 products

So while any particular line has received less support than WFRP, (and really, several of those products are actually re-releases of the material from the core set split into smaller packages) the 40krpg line overall has received a lot more support. So more targeted lines have actually allowed FFG to make more supplements. As a 40k fan, I think this is a pretty good deal.

macd21 said:

I imagine that the new Guides and Vaults, being just the core set in a different format, are an attempt to keep things going longer.

I think alot of you are under-estimating DnD 4E's player base. Whenever I go to a comic store or hobby shop and see people playing RPG's there DnD is always at least 75% of them usualy 100%. The in sales of 4e compared to 3e can be explained away quite simply: Torrent Sites. Far more people have broadband now than when 3e and 3.5 were out. I'm not going to explain any further because I don't want pirates to ruin FFG (The superb quality of their hard products will help keep alot of them at bay too hopefully). In any case, I think that has more to do with DnD sales dropping than a lower quality product. I preferred 3.5 to 4e but I know quite a few people who don't (Wizards and CoDzilla ruined the balance of 3/3.5 for anybody who wanted to play a melee but as a long time Sorc I loved it lol)

Just to interject one thing into this discussion again in case there are some Dev's watching this thread. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make an eldar corebook, I will pay $80 for it if I have to(even if there is 0 new crunch to the book the new art and fluff would be worth it). And let this be proof that for many people the Black Crusade was a good decision, I'm sure there are just as many if not more people out there crazy about Chaos like I am about Eldar.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Possibly, but I think it's probably too soon for that. The game was still new and sales were strong, so personally I don't think that was the purpose of the G + Vs. More likely, IMO, that they simply saw a huge demand for them and decided to fill it. On the other hand the G+Vs are exactly the kind of product that they would release to give sales a boost when they start to go down, so you might be right.

Blood Pact said:

And that's how flame wars always start. Somebody says something without the intent of offense, somebody else feels offended and starts shooting. The first person wasn't aware of saying something offending and then feels unfairly attacked and starts shooting back. Seen this hundreds of times happen.

Alex

macd21 said:

Yeah, no. That is exactly what matters. Now granted we may have a different definition of 'game' here but if an old game like WFRP can be made into a new edition and have some golden years, then DH as a game may have some golden years ahead of it too (in a new edition).

My assertion is that it takes a strong brand though, a household name with gamers (and foremostly of course a good product but a good brand helps a lot if the product isn't all that strong). So the alternative to publishing like 19 core rulebooks is publishing 4 of them and then going into a new edition, new product cycle.

macd21 said:

See you're talking about editions, not games. DH 1e might be past its prime, yes.

macd21 said:

Of course, that's what I am saying - it was a business decision. I'm not questioning that, I'm just saying that some posters here should stop talking as if FFG has made the decision for the sake of the poor customers.

macd21 said:

Yes and now please look at your post here - it implicitly reaffirms everything I have been holding in this thread: that FFG decided on this format because it worked best for them. They did not choose it because it works best for the customer which is what some people have been trying to make us believe here. It is, as I have said, a business decision.

Alex

ak-73 said:

You are assuming the two are mutually exclusive. The reason it is a good business decision is because it is what the customers want. Not everyone wants to buy DH + a never-ending stream of supplements. They want seperate, focused games.