Re: [NetEpic ML] Implications of "epic" proportions

From: Kelvin Henderson <kx.henderson_at_...>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 08:45:53 +1000

At 06:15 PM 4/4/01 +0000, Peter the Ramos wrote:

>As I thought this over does Fanatic taking over epic mean we will
>never see a TRUELY supported epic game by the GW mainstream? Does it
>pretty much mean all we will ever get is a "trickle" of support from
>Fanatic? Will they ever have the guts to produce all new rules for the
>game? Or is it doomed forever to be a "sideshow" game with little real
>support? Will they ever really release a steady stream of new epic
>miniatures? Of course we all know they talk-the-talk, but do they
>walk-the-walk?

As far as Epic from GW main goes: Epic is dead, long live NetEpic. As
Jervis has stated quite a few times before though, Epic 40K is the game he
is most proud of. He is even more proud of that game than he is of Blood
Bowl (sacrilege!). I will admit that epic 40K had the potential to be a
great game, but it fell short in some areas. Epic 40K obviously fell way
short of the mark for sales and enthusiasm and so GW main dropped it like a
hot potatoe. I feel it was too radical a change in too short a time. The
subsequent push to drag 40K players into it failed and so the game passed
into oblivion only to rise again at Fanatic.

I don't think we will ever see another attempt at Epic in the near future
(especially with the Lord of the Rings project underway). 40K and Fantasy
generate the bucks. Side games like Epic, Mordheim and Necromunda are good
to generate a quick cash flow in the short term but will never become a
"core game". Epic is dead, long live NetEpic.

-Kelvin...

"Look, just give me some inner peace
or I'll mop the floor with you."
-Homer
Received on Wed Apr 04 2001 - 22:45:53 UTC