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

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 21:11:00 -0400

Hi!

Kelvin Henderson wrote:

> 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.

Its funny that Jervis repeats that in every issue of the epic magazine
like some kind of mantra. If there is one GW policy that never dies is
the failure to admit a mistake. Somewhat even more ironic is the tone in
the recent epic 40k mags where they seem to want to add more detail to
the game because thats what gamers are telling them to do, but in the
same breath say " we do not want to return to the chaos of the previous
edition" or something to that effect. Its like they are trying to
"re-invent the wheel".

On a side note they even mention net epic in their first article
editiorial, it seems our little voices have reached then in some form or
another. Like I always like to point out, in our own way, we DO make a
difference. Actually for those who frequent the official GW forums the
"what is net epic" question comes up quite a bit.

I personally like the direction epic 40k is taking now, more detail,
more needed rules. Of course had they done that to begin with it would
have perhaps been more palatable to veteran gamers.

> 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.

I agree and go one further, I dont think they will EVER make another
version of epic. Only continue to build on the current system. The
premise on which Fanatic is based seems one of support, not innovation.

I have one other curisoty though, I wonder amongst Fanatics cadre of
second tier games, how does epic fare? My hunch is games like Warmaster
and BFG where they can make more new minis seems to be more of a cash
cow than epic is at the moment. Besides making available the old stuff
what can they do in the way of releases? Sure there's talk of new armies
and such, but I remember mini lines like the Eldar exodites that never
saw the light of day. If even Fanatic cant make money with epic how long
will it last?

Peter
Received on Thu Apr 05 2001 - 01:11:00 UTC