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

From: Kelvin Henderson <kx.henderson_at_...>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 11:41:17 +1000

>As a former retailer I understand that GW must stick to those games that
>produce more money and leave out the rest, or let Fanatic do them. What
>bugs me is that prior to the last change in the rules GW made between
>8-10% of their sales in Epic (US figure from 1995-96) and wanted a robust
>15% with the introduction of the new game.

Now that is a really stupid requirement. There was NEVER going to be THAT
much interest in Epic. Epic is just like Necromunda. There are those
people who are fanatical about it, those people who play it for a while on
its release (or re-release) and those who ignore it. The fanatics are a
small percentage of the crowd, but its they who keep the game alive. To
expect to increase the fanatic base by releasing a completely new version
of the game is stupidity of the highest order.

>Of course not only did they not get that precious 15%, but lost that
>8-10%. In the end epic gamers were made to suffer their incompetence. I
>sometimes wonder what would have happened if an updated (net epic-ish
>version if you will) ofthe previous game system was released would have
>they fared better. But we will never know.

I'm not so sure that it was completely incompetence, I think more blind
stupidity. In the studio, Epic 40K had a huge following (according to all
reports). Because all the staff really liked playing it, they thought they
had a real shot at it. Unfortunately, it made most of us feel very
alienated (I know I did). And THAT is where I see GW's big problem
lies. They seem to think that their customer base is a completely
inexhaustible resource. They really don't seem to grasp the concept that
they are alienating more and more of their loyal customers.

FASA knew all about it which is why Battletech never really got re-written
and why old mechs never really became obsolete. They UPDATED and simply
EXPANDED on the game. The core rules and mechanics never really
changed. I could take a mech I designed 15 years ago and still have it run
perfectly legally under the current rules with only a minor modification or
two (and often, no changes at all).

But GW just doesn't seem to understand that you can do that to a game and
it will still make the cash you want. they seem to think that the only way
to keep a game alive is to COMPLETELY re-write it every 4 years along with
all the forces available for it, making my old force obsolete.

-Kelvin...

"Look, just give me some inner peace
or I'll mop the floor with you."
-Homer
Received on Thu Apr 05 2001 - 01:41:17 UTC