Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision TV!

The latest news and announcements for the Blood Bowl video games.
User avatar
VoodooMike
Posts: 1614
Joined: 14 July 2009, 07:44
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby VoodooMike » 30 July 2013, 19:46

I suspect the makers of the FM series, and probably the Madden series as well as FIFA and WES, would disagree. Yes, there were elements which were different, but they were largely the same game. The big differences were in the player stats and who they played for.
That's a bit of a weak analogy since 1) what remains the same is the basic rules since they are meant to be computer versions of real-world sports and the game is aimed at fans of those real-world sports, 2) the actual game mechanics do change over time, they just continue to focus on approximating what is happening in the real-world sport. Board games are not a real world sport that needs to be updated yearly to better approximate the game on the computer. There's no yearly "Chess" update.
You seem to be forgetting that this is a port of a board game.
Is that what real-time mode and blitz were? Oh, sorry... I forgot... if you don't care about those parts then they effectively don't exist! Why don't you open the game and click the single player button, or direct IP game, etc... and see which option (blitz or classic) someone who isn't a TT player would gravitate toward. That's a deliberate UI decision right there, to have blitz on the left, with text that promotes it over classic, and with the animated guy instead of the greyscale guy who lacks animation. Cyanide/Focus wanted blitz and realtime to be the product's focus, it just didn't work out for them because their realtime mode was terrible and incoherent.

The current product has become focused on classic mode, because everything else failed to get the non TT people. There's no reason the next product has to be like that. BBSC isn't. Dawn of War was, theoretically, a "port" of WH40k, it just didn't use the minis rules to do so, because it aimed to entice RTS players into buying it as well as fans of the WH40K franchise... and it did exactly that. Know what Dawn of War 2 wasnt? The same game as DoW 1.
I don't disagree it shouldn't be done better, and I know how I'd do it. That doesn't change the fact that the leagues online - the ones who play LRB6 as far as possible - still have the option to play without Khorne.
They also have the option to play without CPoMB, so I have no idea what all the fuss is about. They can play without the Block skill, too. It is a ridiculous argument to claim Khorne is an optional change to the game in so much as there is no mechanic forcing you to play as Khorne. There's nothing that prevents you from playing against Khorne unless you convince everyone else to never play it, voluntarily. The AI in single player is notoriously hard to convince... unless you think going in and editing the DB to remove Khorne altogether also counts as it being inherently optional.

Khorne's addition forced everyone who wants to play anything but a secluded private league, to deal with it. This includes people who play in the public MM leagues (which represent the vast majority of play as far as we know) and didn't even buy CE! To say they're optional in this product is silly beyond measure.
But then that community won't be these people.
The composition of communities change, always. At any given time a community is always "these people" by definition.
I, for one, will not buy a game which does not give me the opportunity to play LRB 6 BB. I'd rather play direct-IP or on FUMBBL, frankly.
First... this is rich coming from one of the guys involved in making the Khorne roster. Second, deciding that you'll hate change before you know what change is just makes you an old fart and a luddite. While there's nothing inherently wrong with being an old fart, there are no old farts that help build the future... they just get in the way of the future.

Also, you know what's more useful to Cyanide and Focus than you are? 10 new customers who aren't you. Obviously they have to decide if they can actually appeal to those 10 new customers, first... if not, they might as well stick with you. If so.. well... as important as you feel you are, money talks and old farts walk.
Don't get me wrong: Chaos League was a fun game. But it wasn't Blood Bowl. All I'm suggesting is that the option is there to change the community in the way you suggest and keep the current members of the community happy: all you have to do is make things optional.
As a developer myself I LOVE how easy things are in the minds of non-developers. "All you have to do is...." develop a second game that I want alongside the game you're actually making, to make me and your actual target demographic happy at the same time! If the game they're making is already sufficiently close to the existing CRP game then sure, make an option to play straight CRP. If it's not particularly close to CRP then its not some "little toggle" to make it into CRP, it's writing an entire second product to do that.... which is totally rational since they already sell a product that lets you play CRP with the exception of that Khorne roster you're partially responsible for.

Who knows... maybe BB2 is just another excuse to sell people another copy of the same game, just like LE and CE were. We know that sales of those subsequent versions required steep discounts to get anyone who had previous editions to upgrade, which makes me wonder why they'd bother doing it yet again under that diminishing returns model. Given that everyone involved in the current product no longer works for the company, I'm inclined to think otherwise, but I don't have a functional oujia board or crystal ball, so....
Friendly Reminder: Correlation does not equal Causation - tattoo it on the inside of your eyelids if it'll help.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7040
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby dode74 » 30 July 2013, 21:21

That's a bit of a weak analogy
Not really, since this is a port of a board game. It's what it was originally sold as, it's what their original target demographic want, and it's the only thing that the current playerbase has ever asked for. The vast majority of people who might be interested in a sequel will be those who liked the first game. Give them what they want and that's guaranteed sales rather than some pot of gold at the end of Mike's rainbow.
Is that what real-time mode and blitz were?
No. They were Cyanide's attempts to add something to BB. How well did that go? And yet this is exactly what you are suggesting that Cyanide do! That's quite the gamble; a less charitable person might think you might not have Cyanide's best interests at heart ;)
How many people play Blitz or Real Time? Do you know how many online games of real time have been played this year? Under 200. I'm sure people play those versions offline, but given the total lack of single player dungeonbowl this suggests that the focus is on online play.
The composition of communities change, always. At any given time a community is always "these people" by definition.
Then don't be surprised if the current people don't want to be pushed aside in favour of some mythical larger group of other people. How big is Mike's Mythical Blood Bowl community, anyhow?
First... this is rich coming from one of the guys involved in making the Khorne roster.
Design, not decision to include. Had I been asked "should we include a non-canon roster" I'd have said no. Had I been asked "what new, non-canon roster should be included" I certainly wouldn't have picked the roster we had were the limitations we were under not imposed. Throwing "well you put the Khorne roster in" at me is disingenuous of you.
you know what's more useful to Cyanide and Focus than you are? 10 new customers who aren't you.
You know what's more useful that 10 mythical new customers? One guaranteed customer. Even better is one guaranteed customer and the 10 others.
As a developer myself I LOVE how easy things are in the minds of non-developers. "All you have to do is...." develop a second game that I want alongside the game you're actually making, to make me and your actual target demographic happy at the same time!
That makes me laugh. What, exactly, is the this target demographic you seem to be championing? How far, exactly, do you think they will go from the rules of Blood Bowl while still calling it Blood Bowl? Remember that the IP still belongs to GW and, while the allowed a lot of leeway with Dawn of War in terms of gameplay from WH40k, they certainly didn't allow that much for Blood Bowl in the past and there's no reason to assume that they would want to in future.
If the game they're making is already sufficiently close to the existing CRP game then sure, make an option to play straight CRP.
Exactly.

I'm not suggesting that Chaos League: Blood Spattered Pitch couldn't be a great game in itself, nor that it could be successful, but that it'd be quite the risk to run given the clear and available market research available to them here on the forums and in many other locations.
Image

booncabal76
Posts: 467
Joined: 02 July 2009, 11:07

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby booncabal76 » 30 July 2013, 21:23

but I don't have a functional oujia board or crystal ball, so....
I do.

It's called "the wife", and it never gives me good news.

Interesting discussion - wouldn't it be great if a Focus/Cyanide employee chipped in.......

If anyone's interested, Space Hulk is out on the 15 August....turn based too...

booncabal76
Posts: 467
Joined: 02 July 2009, 11:07

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby booncabal76 » 30 July 2013, 21:26

Just had a thought, I wonder if they'll fix the RNG?

*runs for cover*

User avatar
VoodooMike
Posts: 1614
Joined: 14 July 2009, 07:44
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby VoodooMike » 30 July 2013, 23:21

Not really, since this is a port of a board game. It's what it was originally sold as, it's what their original target demographic want, and it's the only thing that the current playerbase has ever asked for. The vast majority of people who might be interested in a sequel will be those who liked the first game. Give them what they want and that's guaranteed sales rather than some pot of gold at the end of Mike's rainbow.
That's what it was sold as TO YOU, and by you I mean the TT community and by "sold as" I mean "what someone said on the forums to TT people". You'll note that there wasn't a lot of emphasis on it being "a faithful recreation of the board game" when they were selling it on the shelves or on Steam. The video game industry makes more money than hollywood does each year, but this game gets less people and attention than some niche porn flick... it's less about what's at the end of "Mike's Rainbow" than what's outside of "Magdi's Solopsistic Blinders".
No. They were Cyanide's attempts to add something to BB. How well did that go? And yet this is exactly what you are suggesting that Cyanide do! That's quite the gamble; a less charitable person might think you might not have Cyanide's best interests at heart ;)
It went poorly because it was done poorly. It failed to catch or maintain the interests of people who liked the concept, but weren't interested in playing the rather slow turn-based game, leaving only the people who were already fans of the board game, which is why the focus of the community is all on classic mode. Of the two of us, it's not me that is not interested in Cyanide's success - you don't give a damn about the success of the product, you just want what you want, even if that means keeping the product small and barely noticed.
Then don't be surprised if the current people don't want to be pushed aside in favour of some mythical larger group of other people. How big is Mike's Mythical Blood Bowl community, anyhow?
Yeah, you talk a good fight, but again.. the current people are going to buy it anyway, just like they did the previous editions that they swore they wouldn't unless/because <insert whatever here>. They might well wait until it goes on sale, but a lot of the current community would do that nomatter what was published, again, like they did the last time.
You know what's more useful that 10 mythical new customers? One guaranteed customer. Even better is one guaranteed customer and the 10 others.
They're guaranteed a full-price sale to existing people if they make yet another version of the game that does the same thing, eh? They've had to offer steep discounts and sales to get these guaranteed customers to buy the game at any price with each update... but no, why aim for a wider audience when they can get be guaranteed to get some guy they're guaranteed to get anyway, eventually, at a bargain bin price!
What, exactly, is the this target demographic you seem to be championing?
Mass market gamers - people who buy the big titles and who make up the majority of the online gaming community, who are also prone to impulse buying and trying out interesting-looking titles from smaller developers. Is this the ONLY game you've ever played and ONLY game-related community you've ever seen? Sometimes it seems like it... like you're an internet pod-person.
How far, exactly, do you think they will go from the rules of Blood Bowl while still calling it Blood Bowl?
Blood Bowl 2... Ghostbusters 2 wasn't the same movie with better looking actors, and Terminator 2 didn't have the same storyline, etc. The 2 part implies a sequel, you see... not a remake. You have a weird thing about the name. While it may end up being the exact same game, I don't think the name implies it is in any way.
Remember that the IP still belongs to GW and, while the allowed a lot of leeway with Dawn of War in terms of gameplay from WH40k, they certainly didn't allow that much for Blood Bowl in the past and there's no reason to assume that they would want to in future.
Yeah, I've heard this from you and Millandson, but I've not only seen NO evidence that GW has forced them to do any such thing, but we've seen negative evidence in the form of Nelson saying that GW never objected to Chaos Dwarfs after Cyanide tried to claim their exclusion from LE was GW's doing. GW didn't put their foot down on DungeonBowl and it didn't put its foot down over "Blood Bowl - Star Coach". The objection to the name is all on you... GW has never shown any verified interest in forcing Cyanide to do anything at all.
I'm not suggesting that Chaos League: Blood Spattered Pitch couldn't be a great game in itself, nor that it could be successful, but that it'd be quite the risk to run given the clear and available market research available to them here on the forums and in many other locations.
Market research available to them on the forums? Anyone who uses internet forums as a sample for anything at all is batshit crazy-nuts-insane; it'd be like using the kids in the smoking area at a highschool as a sample of what highschool students as a whole think. You'd end up with the result that all highschool students think you should allow smoking in the classroom, and that weed should be legalized. herp derp!
Interesting discussion - wouldn't it be great if a Focus/Cyanide employee chipped in.......
We'd have more luck asking the ouija board, or your wife, methinks.
Friendly Reminder: Correlation does not equal Causation - tattoo it on the inside of your eyelids if it'll help.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7040
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby dode74 » 31 July 2013, 06:09

That's what it was sold as TO YOU, and by you I mean the TT community and by "sold as" I mean "what someone said on the forums to TT people". You'll note that there wasn't a lot of emphasis on it being "a faithful recreation of the board game" when they were selling it on the shelves or on Steam.
It was advertised at E3 as such several years ago, actually. That's a tad more than "someone on a forum said so": it's advertising, which is (admittedly sometimes very loosely) held to standards, and the reason for the disappointment of some of the posters on this forum.
It went poorly because it was done poorly. It failed to catch or maintain the interests of people who liked the concept, but weren't interested in playing the rather slow turn-based game, leaving only the people who were already fans of the board game, which is why the focus of the community is all on classic mode.
A lot of people who were fans of the (also niche) Chaos League (and its sequel) played as well. Chaos League had a really very good RT mode which I, for one, enjoyed very much. It worked because it was designed to be played that way from the ground up: there were no preconceptions as to what it should be because we weren't told it would be anything else.
I tried RT BB. I tried to like it. I could not despite the fact that Chaos League's RT mode was my favourite of the modes available to that game. It didn't work because it wasn't designed to be played that way: BB's rules were made for the "slow turn-based game", and mixing the two was both confusing to the newbie and unappealing the TT enthusiast.
A new Chaos League (or MLF) type game would be great, but what it would not be is a sequel to Blood Bowl.
Of the two of us, it's not me that is not interested in Cyanide's success - you don't give a damn about the success of the product, you just want what you want, even if that means keeping the product small and barely noticed.
I've never stated anything other than what I do want: I don't have the right to speak for anyone. At best I can summarise what I've read here on these boards.
You, however, have openly stated your animosity for the companies involved (justified or not), and it's you who are claiming that they should be shooting for Mike's Mythical Blood Bowl community instead of the current fanbase: some "silent majority" which you assure them is there for the taking and will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams. Forgive me if I don't think your intentions are entirely as honourable as you make out ;)
the current people are going to buy it anyway
So you do have a Ouija board!
but no, why aim for a wider audience when they can get be guaranteed to get some guy they're guaranteed to get anyway, eventually, at a bargain bin price!
I've not said that they shouldn't aim for a wider audience. I've only said that LRB6 needs to be an option in order to get those "guaranteed" purchases. The only time it's an either/or is if BB2 is something wildly different to BB the TT game, in which case they're taking your gamble.
Mass market gamers - people who buy the big titles and who make up the majority of the online gaming community, who are also prone to impulse buying and trying out interesting-looking titles from smaller developers.
It may come as a shock to you but this isn't a mass-market game, and Cyanide isn't a mass-market game company, nor have they shown any inclination to move in that direction. Or perhaps you'd like to tell them what they need to do with Pro Cycling Manager too? I don't doubt that giving guns and engines to the likes of Froome and Wiggins would make for more "mass market" appeal to the game (an increase the odds of a third British TDF victory!), but would it then be Pro Cycling Manager?
Blood Bowl 2... Ghostbusters 2 wasn't the same movie with better looking actors, and Terminator 2 didn't have the same storyline, etc. The 2 part implies a sequel, you see... not a remake.
Blood Bowl is a movie now? And you have the temerity to accuse me of weak analogies! Blood Bowl has no plot to be a sequel to, and is far more analogous to the real-world game format such as the FM series to which I have alluded than it is to a movie.
Championship Manager (as it was) 1, 2, 3 etc. Same game, updated database and maybe some added pictures. Only after Eidos and SI split did things change in any dramatic way.
You have a weird thing about the name. While it may end up being the exact same game, I don't think the name implies it is in any way.
The name comes with a host of expectations, most of which are laid out by GW in the rulebook. Calling a Cava "Champagne" does not make it so, and calling Chaos League (or other FF derivative) "Blood Bowl" doesn't make it so either, but both set up expectations which will be false.
Yeah, I've heard this from you and Millandson, but I've not only seen NO evidence that GW has forced them to do any such thing...
GW has never shown any verified interest in forcing Cyanide to do anything at all.
How quickly you forget Slann.
Market research available to them on the forums? Anyone who uses internet forums as a sample for anything at all is batshit crazy-nuts-insane; it'd be like using the kids in the smoking area at a highschool as a sample of what highschool students as a whole think.
Oh come one Mike, you know more about sampling than this. Any market research, while taking its assumptions and limitations into account, is better than none at all.
Image

User avatar
Koadah
Posts: 1211
Joined: 08 April 2009, 16:17
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby Koadah » 31 July 2013, 09:40

What, exactly, is the this target demographic you seem to be championing?
Mass market gamers - people who buy the big titles and who make up the majority of the online gaming community, who are also prone to impulse buying and trying out interesting-looking titles from smaller developers. Is this the ONLY game you've ever played and ONLY game-related community you've ever seen? Sometimes it seems like it... like you're an internet pod-person.
If that is what you want then you need to hit them via real time. A good real time. No need to change classic other than just fixing it.

But mass market boys will probably already have heard of this game. They may even have tried it. Why should they come back unless you can demo a real time that is really awesome?

Not including CRP mode sounds crazy. There is no reason to turn down easy money.

Trying to make turn based a mass market game isn't going to work. It is niche, niche niche.
Your mass market boys are not going to pay £30-£40 for that.

I thought we already had it agreed..

Awesome real time.
Good classic.
Expanded blitz.
Good tutorial
Idiot mode.

With a good tutorial & idiot mode we don't need kiddie mode.

With all that it will still be a niche game. And do we really think they can pull off an awesome real time?
CaRBB

User avatar
VoodooMike
Posts: 1614
Joined: 14 July 2009, 07:44
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby VoodooMike » 02 August 2013, 06:34

I tried RT BB. I tried to like it. I could not despite the fact that Chaos League's RT mode was my favourite of the modes available to that game. It didn't work because it wasn't designed to be played that way: BB's rules were made for the "slow turn-based game", and mixing the two was both confusing to the newbie and unappealing the TT enthusiast.
Yes, BB's realtime mode just isn't fun. Nobody is disputing this fact. If it were fun, this game would have a very different history than it does.
A new Chaos League (or MLF) type game would be great, but what it would not be is a sequel to Blood Bowl.
Well, thanks for your opinion. I disagree because I disagree that they're somehow married to the board game just because you want them to be. I think we can leave it at that because now you've moved into being randomly obtuse and saying stupid crap like:
You, however, have openly stated your animosity for the companies involved (justified or not), and it's you who are claiming that they should be shooting for Mike's Mythical Blood Bowl community instead of the current fanbase: some "silent majority" which you assure them is there for the taking and will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams. Forgive me if I don't think your intentions are entirely as honourable as you make out ;)
Seriously, do you think they're sitting there reading this conversation and making their plans based on it? No? Then maybe you should stop making stupid implications like my motivation for saying what I say is to sabotage the companies involved. Tinfoil is for cooking, not fashioning your tard-hats out of.
So you do have a Ouija board!
I know who the most vocal opponents to the new version and purchasing it were, and that they've since bought it anyway... myself included... eventually the price hits the point where it's hard to say no given that its related to something you like or are interested in. Either that's valid or you'll have to share your own ouija board since your previous statements are based on:
At best I can summarise what I've read here on these boards.
Herp derp.
I've not said that they shouldn't aim for a wider audience. I've only said that LRB6 needs to be an option in order to get those "guaranteed" purchases. The only time it's an either/or is if BB2 is something wildly different to BB the TT game, in which case they're taking your gamble.
Right, and we disagree on LRB6 needing to be involved, not on the merits of aiming for a wider audience. It's peachy if they can fit it in somewhere... but it'd be re-writing a game they already wrote, which took years to get to the point of bugginess it's currently in. From my perspective, as a developer, there'd have to be a huge benefit to doing a total rewrite of something... and it'd have to really benefit from starting over, rather than just advancing the old codebase. I don't see such a benefit, but hey, maybe there is one.
It may come as a shock to you but this isn't a mass-market game, and Cyanide isn't a mass-market game company, nor have they shown any inclination to move in that direction.
A failure says what? Cyanide absolutely has shown an inclination to move in that direction... again, go check out their AGoT:RPG... they licensed a mainstream popular IP and got the actors from the TV show to voice characters. Anyone who decides to set their sights low is guaranteed not to achieve much more than that. You can shoot high and fall short... and often will, but you're guaranteed garbage if you aim low from the start.
Or perhaps you'd like to tell them what they need to do with Pro Cycling Manager too? I don't doubt that giving guns and engines to the likes of Froome and Wiggins would make for more "mass market" appeal to the game (an increase the odds of a third British TDF victory!), but would it then be Pro Cycling Manager?
PCM is a very different animal. It has a loyal following and is a genuine niche game... they're not looking to expand on the license, and the people who buy it are happy with the product. BB does not have a loyal following... it has a community that mostly badmouths it and balks at buying a new copy every year at full price and would bail on it the second someone offered them a viable alternative.... and cyanide has expressed obvious intent to expand on the license in the form of DB and SC... and now, potentially BB2.
The name comes with a host of expectations, most of which are laid out by GW in the rulebook. Calling a Cava "Champagne" does not make it so, and calling Chaos League (or other FF derivative) "Blood Bowl" doesn't make it so either, but both set up expectations which will be false.
With the caveat that all of those expectations are only from the people like you who are hellbent on a computer version of the game that exactly implements the board game and prioritizes that over all else. The average gamer has no such expectation... and really, at this point the average TT enthusiast doesn't expect that from Cyanide either, though for other reasons.
How quickly you forget Slann.
Oh? Did GW confirm that they forbid slann's inclusion in BB:CE? I was under the impression that the sum total of that concept was put forward by some chick who drew pictures for the game... a cyanide employee. See also: the Chaos Dwarf thing.
Oh come one Mike, you know more about sampling than this. Any market research, while taking its assumptions and limitations into account, is better than none at all.
Using this forum as research would be a terrible idea unless your target demographic is the people on this forum. This forum does not represent computer gamers in general... it primarily represents TT enthusiasts. No, it would not be better than nothing unless you genuinely believed it represented the larger audience, or at least approximated it. I don't think it does... not even close.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If that is what you want then you need to hit them via real time. A good real time. No need to change classic other than just fixing it.
Right, and what I'm saying is that they don't need classic at all in the new product. I don't think they're going to magically create a better and more functional version of classic TT in half the time they've spent on the existing product.. and the only people they'd be aiming to get for the purchases are the existing owners of BB1. It seems like a waste of resources to do that, to me... but it depends on their goals, obviously.
Not including CRP mode sounds crazy. There is no reason to turn down easy money.
How long, and how steep a discount, did it take to get you to buy CE? If all they do is drag BB1 and stick it directly into the new product then I can agree... though what'd be the point of buying it if you already have the current product? Past that, how is having CRP in the new product a big motivation to buy it for owners of the existing product, unless you assume they've somehow made a perfect awesome version in a fraction of the time they spent on the one we've already got? Maybe it also comes with a ferrari and a handjob from a supermodel?
Trying to make turn based a mass market game isn't going to work. It is niche, niche niche.
Your mass market boys are not going to pay £30-£40 for that.
Like the newer XCom games? It can be done, but realistically I agree I don't see it being done in this case.
With all that it will still be a niche game. And do we really think they can pull off an awesome real time?
[/quote]
With all that it would not merely be a niche game if it had awesome realtime, good tutorials, and effective single player AI. It wouldn't need classic at all to be a big deal with that (only in order to be a big deal with the TT folks). Do we think they can pull it off? Ehhh... I'll admit my expectations are not high, but they've done some interesting games since BB, focusing on story telling and characters.
Friendly Reminder: Correlation does not equal Causation - tattoo it on the inside of your eyelids if it'll help.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7040
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby dode74 » 02 August 2013, 09:48

You think BB2 should be something totally new and not Blood Bowl because they want to target a totally different audience. I don't, and I think the fact that they're calling it BB2 suggests that BB players are their target audience. It's that simple. Only time will tell which they will do.
Image

Itchen Masack
Posts: 156
Joined: 04 November 2011, 08:27

Re: Blood Bowl 2: Discover Jim & Bob on live on CabalVision

Postby Itchen Masack » 02 August 2013, 11:41

Dode play the game. All posts at this stage of a thread must contain no less that 5 separate quotes from previous posts or they dont count.

Oh whoops, I'm out :oops:


Return to “News & Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron