Why bother about Games Workshop? Because it matters!

Every time somebody mentions Games Workshop anywhere, it is likely to spark a lively discussion. This article is not going to end those discussions. I'm just trying to figure out what it is that is driving those discussions. What do wargamers expect of GW, and what bothers them so much?

A nice example of some GW-love to be found on the net

First of all, everyone agrees about what makes GW special: high quality miniatures (let’s see failcast as an short term aberration), well developed and engaging mythos and mostly innovative games. Although this applies more to the ‘specialist games’ than to Warhammer.

Second, I don’t think it’s about prices. What is acceptable is an individual consideration. I feel awkward at spending more than 3 pounds on a 28mm miniature, while others will gladly smack down a tenner for a superior sculpt. So almost all GW stuff I own I got second hand or remaindered. I was tempted but didn’t even buy the LOTR Nazghul set at half price. Many people have no such inhibitions. But generally people will not get worked up over this much, especially now there are reasonable alternatives.

Where GW lost the plot is in the peripheral shenanigans: gamesdays, White Dwarf, intellectual property, its treatment of its own shops and independent traders and most of all the players. In the last five years we've seen GW's heavy handed approach towards fansites that where keeping alive the interesting in older games, like BloodBowl. And the policy that favoured the online store over independent brick and mortar shops. Then the end of the specialist games. Or the new model for the games days, which was less show, more shop. And now the demise of the monthly White Dwarf in favour of a weekly plus a monthly glossy. In all, it looks like GW is sacrificing its community for the quick buck. 

The point is why non-GW wargamers bother about that at all? I mean, apart from the enjoyment of sticking  it to 'the Man'. My guess is that it is the notion that Warhammer is the portal for young kids to start wargaming. We want more opponents to play against, and somehow expect GW to deliver generation upon generation of fresh blood. 

Of course, Non-GW players realise that the things they value in a lively hobby are not always the same as those of a stock marketed company. GW is in the money making business and has no interest whatsoever in providing clientele to its competition. Not for nothing does it expressly ignore other forms of wargaming by declaring itself The Hobby. No wonder wargamers feel irked by that, but GW have no obligation to anyone other than their shareholders.

An relevant question is whether GW actually serves as the gateway to wargaming. As someone who delved directly into historical wargaming, I have no personal experience, but a comment on one of the Masterminis GW blogs made a big impression on me. A former GW European mainland employee remarked that after the first year about 40% of GW 'kids' quit wargaming altogether, 30% stay in The Hobby and the other 30% move on to clubs or play in their own circle. Which kind of proves the point that we have a real stake in GW's success.

So, with this in mind, many wargamers are torn on the issue of whether they’d like to see The Evil Empire fall or fear the disappearance of those young lads from wargaming forever and see the hobby die out. In fact, knowing those 40% of kids disappearing after GW has ransacked their (parents') wallets breaks our hearts. And we have a sense that if GW pisses of more people, they will not turn to other games and manufacturers, but disappear from wargaming for ever.

So wargamers have good reasons to worry about GW's recent attempts to antagonise their community. The sense of powerlessness only makes it worse.  

A Wasted Crisis?

So yesterday I had a wasted Crisis, but in the positive sense of the word: three Leffe Blond got me quite happy in the late afternoon. But it was mostly talking to some people I had been looking forward to meet.

Leo explaining the Samurai game to Bert and Jan-Willem

First of all, I had great time in the car with Dick, Michel and Hans, discussing games and possible purchases. Dick, thanks for the lift! At the TFL stand I finally met Sidney Roundwood, who was very generous in more than one way. Can´t wait to get to the UK once more. There's a not so flattering pic of us on the Pijlie's blog. That post is a nice reflection on Crisis as well.

At the well attended meeting with members of the Dutch Miniature Wargames facebook group, I spoke to Julius, who will be off to Turkey for four years. And Fred, who's just moved to Amersfoort. I finally  handed René the copy of Okko I promised him a year ago. It was good to see Leo, Arvid, Jan-Willem, Bert and Joop having so much fun at the Samurai participation game at the Karawansaray stand.

Arvid on the right, also in explanatory mode.
Joop on the left composing a Haiku

Gerrit told me about the differences between paper, wood and resin buildings. Duncan had noticed my purchase of Haïtian revolutionaries and maroons and was demanding a follow up article. Jasper divulged that the book on the Duke of Alva that I'm looking forward will be presented in Madrid in three weeks to to one of his offspring. The most awesome news I got was that Neil had taken two young kids into his care. A very brave and very admirable thing to do!

I spent much of the afternoon getting to know Mats and Jos in the bar. Discussion ranged from maroons to 17th century flags to the Hoeken & Kabeljauwen to public relations and the raising of somebody else's kids. We seemed to agree on the 'state of the hobby' which is characterised by many willing to create valuable things for nothing and many willing to pay too much for very little. Think of the brilliant stuff put online for (almost) free and the prices people are willing to pay for GW stuff.

That is not a market in which many people can make a living. For most of the miniature manufacturers, rules designers and small publishers it is more a work of love in their spare time rather than a good living. The hourly 'wages' are only acceptable because it is something they love doing and the recognition they get from buyers and players. That also means that their web shops are occasionally badly done, that they have no presence on social media, that you can only pay cash at their stands. All of that costs them customers.

Some small shops will keep coming and going. Occasionally one will rise above the amateurism and take a significant slice of the pie, like Fantasy Flight and Z-Man in boardgames or Battlefront in miniatures. But Mats was right when he raised questions on the long term future of wargaming if miniature manufacturers, writers and publishers fail to link up to the experiences of new generations of gamers.  It's not lethal to the hobby I guess, but the Golden Age we seem to experience right now, might be one that doesn't last forever.

A better look at the beautiful table

This blog is characteristically short of images. I just didn't take many as I spent more time talking that walking aroudn. You can see all the pretty stuff at the blogs of Little Lions and Paint In.

A Change of the Guard

It's all very tempting to look back these days. There was 100 years of H.G. Wells' Little Wars, then Willem Schoppen, the ´Dutch Donald Featherstone´ was taken into hospital and then The Donald himself passed away. It feels like the end of an era.

Welsh Guards (Wargaming Miscellany: Bob Cordery)

Given the massive outpooring of reminiscences in the blogosphere, it feels like in a sense we are now paying our last respects to the last wargaming pioneers. Wells who made the transition from an officers' teaching tool to a civilian's game, Featherstone who popularised it in the Anglo-Saxon world, Schoppen who popularised it in the Netherlands.

Look at the sense of novelty and pioneering this old hand describes in his memories of wargaming in the 1950s and 60s. Or read Achtung Schweinhund by Harry Pearson for a more elaborate depiction of those years. There is a recent spate of books on wargaming, boardgaming and roleplaying history. But of course, the pioneering era ended some decades ago already. Don Featherstone has already been 'succeeded' by others.

Okay, no Featherstone, but I do have some gamer cred

I just found out I actually have no book by Featherstone at all! I always took him as an icon whose designs had been surpassed by new generations of writers like Bruce Quarry and Stuart Asquith, of whom I have several books each.

Starting wargaming with Hinchliffe miniatures, I was then totally overwhelmed by Foundry's Franco-Prussian range. Just like Magic: the Gathering was a watershed in terms of visual appeal and gaming tension. I remember coming back from a games show and teaching all my friends how to play the next week and then buying them all starter packs the week after that.

Willem Schoppen and his wife from a Dutch popular
science magazine in the early 1980s

To me, Willem Schoppen and his Boutique La Grande Armée are natural points of reference, but they are meaningless to most Dutch gamers of my age and younger. Donald Featherstone means nothing to tens of thousands of kids in GW stores worldwide, and neither does Gary Gygax, Von Reiswitz or Phil Barker (I'll share that story with you tomorrow). And they don't have to. Just like you don't need to have heard the Beatles to appreciate One Direction or to have read Marx to appreciate Lenin's writing.

And now there's discussion of a Golden Age in wargaming and boardgaming and on the other hand one of 'the hobby's dying out'. Lots of new stuff is happening. In terms of boardgaming the mechanical revolution has passed from the German/euro style games to wargames and Ameritrash. In wargaming the revolution is now mostly in highly thematic skirmishing rules after a period of highly formated competition rules. And design and marketing have received a welcome energy by crowdfunding schemes in the middle of a general crisis for gaming companies.

But as ever, there is a process of creative destruction going on. The success of Too Fat Lardies, Bolt Action and Flames of War will mean the quiet disappearance of other rule sets, just as Avalon Hill was eaten up by Hasbro and Wizards of the Coast, Peter Laing and Minifigs have become memories of the past. Hinchliffe was sold to Skytrex and now Skytrex itself has gone into administration. Those that see only growth, just don't notice all that we leave behind.

There are counter movements though, like the one sparked by the Little Wars anniversary. I see a dozen gamers with a sense of nostalgia buying up their 54mm toy soldiers and playing Old Skool on their brittle knees in the garden again. I guess there is an age between 13 and 50 where you feel too serious about this kind of thing, just like you feel to serious to play monsters battles with Play-Doh. Wrong!

Grown Men (Hail! Hail! Freedonia: Jim Wallman)

Maybe we all just got old

And maybe that is what people yearn for the most when they hanker back to the good old days of Wells and Featherstone. A period when they were young, when it seemed the whole world was still there to explore and map and everybody was enjoying it. It all became more complicated with time. Wargaming became work, with lots of accounting and legal prose. Maybe as the world was mapped and better understood, players lost the freshness and joy in arguments over rules, regimental lace and the intricate mechanisms of phalanx combat.

We need to find back, bring back and/or keep alive that sheer fun of the game. I used to get up early to get to the club in time to play four games of Napoleonics for a club competition. I played 24 hour RPGs marathons. It was the best thing I could think of doing then and even though life now gets in the way much of the time, it still is one of the few ways of spending my time now totally engrossed, immersed, occupied and happy.

If you want to honour your heroes, if you want to keep this hobby alive but you worry about the fact that we can't get the youngsters in anymore, or if you just want an opponent for your dust covered Royalists, do it by playing. With anyone, anywhere, in any way possible, because mechanisms and realism and correct painting schemes don't matter. Just play that game with the same intent and joy as you played when you were playing with the Don.

A Golden Age of Boardgaming? Maybe, maybe not

Quinns, of the Shut Up & Sit Down boardgaming blog and video reviews recently gave an entertaining if longish talk at the GameCity video gaming conference on the development of boardgames in the last 15 years. He contended that boardgames are now experiencing a Golden Age and argues this mostly on the basis of a marriage of 'German' style mechanisms with 'American' storytelling. This is a story often told in many different ways at Fortress Ameritrash?.

The presentation includes many of the most interesting boardgame designs of the period under review (although War of the Ring is incredibly left out, while City of Horror is included for no good reason). If your not familiar with boardgaming design developments, the whole video is well worth watching, otherwise some of it will feel familiar.

The thesis of a Golden Age of boardgaming only partly convinces. There are many signs of crisis in the boardgaming industry and it is doubtful whether more people are boardgaming these days than 15 years ago. So we should at least differentiate between boardgame design, the boardgaming industry and the hobby.  While I can mostly agree with Quinns on boardgame design going through a strong patch, I have strong doubts about the industry and the hobby.

What I will do today is go is explore Quinns argument on board game design, and then discuss the industry and the hobby on Sunday. Part of that discussion has already filtered into my discussion of brick & mortar game shops in the last couple of days.

Design

Quinn uses the first part of the presentation to show the influence of German style boardgame designs from the 1990s. I’m fully agreed that these designs were more accessible than many older boardgames, and the design built on keeping the race tight until the end. But Quinn adds the dimension of the higher quality of components. On the other hand, theme in most of these games is thin.

By the start of the 21^st century these design concepts started to be copied by ‘western’ designers, who mixed them with ‘American’ storytelling. Examples mentioned are Twilight Imperium, Game of Thrones and more recently X-Wing.

Dominion, the start of something beautiful?

To illustrate how quickly innovation is now taking place in design he went over the recent deckbuilding revolution, starting with Dominion in 2008. Thunderstone in 2009 added theme. Puzzle Strike then allowed playing the oppononent’s deck in 2010. And in 2011 A Few Acres of Snow integrated the deckbuilder into a boardgame, modelling the logistics of war.

Quinns actually leaves the two most exciting developments in game design to the end of the presentatio. The Boardgame Remix Kit allows you to combine elements from Monopoly, Scrabble, Cluedo and Trivial Pursuit to ´build the most dangerous things´. Risk Legacy lets players name continents, add new rules and extra information to the board as the result of events during the game. In this way each copy of the game becomes unique, with it´s own history. 

If it weren't for the Halifax Hammer...

While I agree with the general line of his argument I have two questions. On the one hand, we can also see how innovative designs like Dominion are copied and milked by less innovative designers and publishers.  While further developing the deckbuilding engine, are Thunderstone and other deckbuilder derivates actually good games who themselves will stand the test the time?  

You could also argue that most of this innovation is incremental but that these are not game changers. How many people outside, or even inside the hobby niche, will actually notice?  


Boardgames vs videogames

Later Quinns´ presentation becomes an attempt convert video gamers to board games. He argues that the boardgames revival happened because video games lately haven't reached into areas of social interaction, which leaves room for boardgames.

Videogames are versatile, he continues, but they cannot do everything, like talking, bluffing, joking and auctioning. It’s difficult to imagine a paranoid treason game like Battlestar Galactica or The Resistance working in a video environment.

One of the best games of the past decade. It made me watch the series

Boardgames also do stuff that videogames haven’t done yet: like the dungeoneering mega campaigns of Descent. That kind of 'maximalist' game design is not commercially viable in videogames but in some cases in boardgaming.

Most importantly, Quinns sees no real difference between board and videogames. To him they are two sides of the gaming hobby. Board game design principles can provide a solid foundation for video games with the example of  the recent X-Com being designed as a boardgame. The design tools of bardgames are much more accessible, require less investment and are easier to test. 

Paths of Glory, itself a legendary design, is one of the card driven games that can be enjoyed online using ACTS

But as far as I´m concerned the line between boardgames and videogames is already disappearing. Look at the online engines to play boardgames that have become available: ACTS for card driven games, Vassal for wargames, BrettSpielWelt for eurogames and there´s a host of online/browser games from Travian and Die2Nite to iPad versions of many popular boardgames. 

How will this affect boardgames in the future? Will this mean that physical boardgames will disappear and people will play them online with their friends? Not necessarily. The technology to digitalise boards in player mats is already available, which will allow you to play and easily store long playing games for later use.

It will also make it possible to hardwire the rules into the game components, preventing mistakes or cheating, and allowing limited information, hidden movement and administrative chores to be automated, while still retaining the feel of a boardgame!