My thoughts on the sometimes questionable effects of commercialised wargaming have surfaced from time to time on this blog. Most recently, in a post disagreeing with Richard Clarke, I was keen to emphasise that at the heart of our hobby was the concept of a bunch of amateur individuals, essentially creating the hobby for themselves, with or without the help of the bigger commercial companies.
Richard's article was inspired by his despairing reaction to gamers' accusations of 'commercialism' when new editions of rules (and their various supplements) are produced, a process judged by some to have more to do with wringing more money out of punters than enhancing anyone's gaming experience. Certainly, relatively small (and well-intentioned) companies like the Two Fat Lardies are hardly the ones to blame here. But the issue is real when one considers a company the size of Games Workshop.
WW2 gaming has been much on my mind recently, and I have been taking an interest in Flames of War and Battlefront Miniatures - FoW is, after all, the biggest WW2 miniatures game out there. And, as most of you will know, the process of churn and burn (as it is sometimes called) is often prominent with that company and set of rules. New editions of the rules, new editions of the various army and campaign books, new points systems, the sudden dropping of models and periods which aren't profitable for new ones that are - most of you will be familiar with this process.
Although Battlefront and Warlord Games are not (unlike GW) publicly-owned companies quoted on any stock exchange, they do have shareholders - for example, I understand Hornby have a 25% stake in Warlord Games. This seems to be a crucial factor. At that point, profit really does become the bottom line. Shareholder dividends are the top priority. As I understand it, this is a legal requirement.
I have serious doubts about the relationship of such companies to the amateur hobby I joined back in the early 70s. I think they are best regarded with suspicion. That may seem a bit harsh, as there are certainly many likeable hobby enthusiasts working in prominent positions in such companies. But churn and burn is a fact - how long before the next edition of Bolt Action?
This post was inspired by the video linked below. It comes from the Sci/Fi-Fantasy end of miniature gaming, but it seems very relevant to me. Eloquent, fun to watch and informative.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteI would take a slightly kinder perspective. Firstly, it seems a good thing that the hobby is now big enough and joined together enough to allow for a commercialisation that can hopefully put a better product in our hands and give us choice. I imagine that there are now more people making a proper living out of their business interest than has ever been possible before.
ReplyDeleteI think Wargames Illustrated for example having a staff of 4 and I feel that a worthy thing of itself to support if I can.
In my experience, most books only bring out a second edition when the life of the 1st edition has expired. For example I seem to recall that Swordpoint from Gripping Beast took 5 years for the 1st Edition to sell out and I think the print run was only something like 3500, so these things are slow burners.
When it comes time to think about a second printing and a second edition, errata, gamer experience / feedback and indeed the designers own thoughts on things can change things. If I might respectfully use your Shadow of the Eagles rolls as an example, if you got an opportunity of a new print run / edition, you might likely re-present the skirmisher rules as written in the first edition to match the new rules you made available for download. There was nothing wrong with the original rules, but I know you have some new ideas on how you would like to see them work.
Bolt Action and Black Powder got new editions after something like 10 years and tens of thousands of hours worth of gaming sessions and the sense that I get is that most seem to like the latest edition of Bolt Action with its sensible changes.
I would also think that part of the necessary formula for a re-print is the essential element that fans of the first edition will want the new edition …. Otherwise, using the example above, how could Gripping Beast justify a new ruleset if it has to find a new fresh market for a 3500 print run.
What I am not keen on is a core rule set that then goes on to spurn loads of army list based add ons that need to be bought. A fully self contained set like your Shadow of the Eagles is the very sort of set that I want to buy. I could live with free downloadable lists etc. But generally I see the path of necessary supplements to be more of a commercial sting than new editions of core rules that have come to the end of their natural life, either by sold out lines or new ways of thinking about rule content and presentation.
I do like the presentation of modern full colour well presented rule books and cannot join the ranks of those who yearn for an earlier time when we bought typewriter print rule books, faced in some pastel coloured light card with a black & white bit of artwork on the front.
The danger of great presentation being easily possible is that these days with computer design it is easy to do the sizzle bit, while the presence of the beef (good actual content) can vary. So sets can be all sizzle and little beef, hopefully we get the max of both, with well thought out and tested content.
I have recently bought two new rulesets, ever drawn in to the next shiny thing, only to feel that there is mostly nothing really new, just another learning curve, pushing me back towards just good old fashioned …. Researching and writing my own rules, sticking with them and making them better along that journey, not to try and make the next greatest set, but just doing it for the simple joy of wargaming.
Arguably commercialism has driven up standards, but like most things in life, when you are old enough to see the ‘then and ‘now’, you get to feel that what we have now is very good, but we have also lost something along the way.
Ah Norm, the voice of reason as usual! Certainly churn and burn is a game for the small number of large concerns in historical wargaming. Dave Ryan at Caliver wouldn't consider a 2nd edition of SotE because he still had loads of copies of the 1st edition unsold!
DeletePersonally I would like more cheap rule sets without all the high production values. But they don't make enough return for a profit-driven company. I enjoyed purchasing Rapid Fire! Reloaded recently - just £5, with all the data sheets needed available for free download. I'd love to see more of that - but it seems unlikely.
I have been increasingly disconnected from the hobby for a few years. I think it’s all the expensive fad games and as you say increasingly frequent latest rules editions. GW has never really been my thing, I do not really like Grimdark or indeed their ‘product’. It’s just the greed of companies like GW, Warlord and the like. I actively walk past the Warlord stand at shows. I have heard people bemoan their cancelling of games and ranges at the drop of a hat. People buy into these ‘fads’ and it totally bewilders me. I am more closer to H.G. Wells than anything that’s around today. If I looked at entering the hobby as it stands now I do not think I would have any interest whatsoever. Simon
ReplyDeleteI understand your feelings, although I find that in my group of wargaming friends a fairly old-school sense of balance means going for 'fads' is unusual. This keeps me interested and engaged. There's still plenty of room in the hobby for those with a firmly amateur, non-commercial outlook.
DeleteI enjoy watching 'Uncle Adam's' videos as they are well produced, not too long and generally have something interesting to say, even if it is mainly sci-fi or fantasy related. His current one a case in point. When I used to play Warhammer, a lot of the reasons for new editions of the rules, often came down to lack of playtesting of the supplements with regards to how they affected the core rules. I remember the competition players at the club pointing out 'glaring errors' in both over the years, which drove many of us away from the game.
ReplyDeleteAs Norm has eloquently pointed out, sometimes a new edition can be welcome, for a variety of reasons. I know that BPII is a much better game than the original, based upon countless hours of games and suggested tweaks on various forums. Of course they could have released a few pages in a pdf instead, but I'm as guilty as the next man in liking everything in one tome. Bolt Action 3 I see in a different light, with issues within the core rules from the first edition onwards. Also rules that are geared towards competitive play tend to see more new editions than others. I remember our old club used to host a PBI competition each year and the Oxford Wargames Club (?) would turn up each year with a killer list, to point out 'flaws' within the core rules/lists.
So despite being tempted by 'O' Group et al, I'm still very happy with my battered copy of BKCII, which just works for me on so many levels, alongside having everything I need in one book. If only that were the norm these days...
I think all forms of input to our hobby helps, at time we can get a bad press for our hobby ( Salute with the reenactment group wearing Swastika to name one). However thankfully these hiccups are few and far between. I was looking at the well produced and glossy wargaming mags produced by several publishers in Smith's last week and it struck me that all the photos of the figures and models were fantastic but if I was new to wargaming there is a chance that I would walk away thinking that I was unable to meet the standard of painting or modelling required. Nothing wrong with fantastic wargaming eye candy but from my perspective there is a lack of basic simple building, painting, modelling and wargaming. In simple terms is commercial wargaming driving up standards at the cost of individualism, that is not a problem to me as I have been doing this hobby for nearly 60 years but I wonder how many newcomers are pushed away by fear of poor painting or lack of confidence.
ReplyDeleteWillz.
The churn and burn model only really works with organized, competitive games. The rest of us can clearly choose to use whatever rules we prefer and that our gaming partners are willing to play. My gaming group played some lightly modified Bolt Action, it was a fine (certainly not ‘great’) skirmish level WWII game. One competitive player wouldn’t play, because he did not want to confuse the few house rules in his mind with the rules he needed for competitive play.
ReplyDeleteI can see what you're saying, but I think that even outside the competition arena the pressure to keep up with the latest version exists. But to repeat, I think it is fair to emphasise this is only a real issue with the very largest historical gaming companies, Battlefront being the most obvious example.
DeleteI think the troubles of Wargames commercialisation can simply be related to the real world. Looking at the real world and normal western market philosophy and products requires obsolescence built in to make any business viable. Think about how car manufacturers wondered what to do after rust bucket renewals faded away. They came up with a whole range of new add ins that required you to want to upgrade, they even flogged pointless wind tunnel perfect body profiles for a while in the 80’s. So it is simply an indicator that our hobby has grown and continues to mature. The really great thing is people still like to game with miniatures-again the personal computer games era was meant to wipe it out - where is Wii or guitar hero these days let alone the pc itself. No the staggering thing is that miniatures wargaming is still a vibrant activity: And digital imaging has worked in its favour. And if you don’t like say epic 15mm at least there are still other choices. Which leads me finally to stamp collecting - it’s died out and what of railway modelling? - hornby launched a new model scale presumably to skew the congested market to their advantage- that hobby has long said goodbye to the cottage industry of an infinite number of metal engine kits opting for mass production of impressive ready to run plastic body models albeit with less choice and “when it’s gone it’s gone” production runs. If you don’t like rules upgrades don’t take them, write your own - with ai that becomes even easier! Yep I think the wargamer has more to be happy about than sad. Thanks for the post Keith.
ReplyDelete"I think the wargamer has more to be happy about than sad." Yes indeed - thankfully you're absolutely right about that.
Delete