You'll never be cool enough for the Cheerleaders

An interesting conversation was raised the other day on one of the web forums, about the perceived cost of the hobby of Wargaming.  Well specifically Games Workshop, of course.  Oddly I found myself defending them  in the process of challenging the belief it is an expensive hobby, but it begs the wider question, of on what grounds do you define expensive?

The argument essentially was that to start Warhammer or 40k costs around £4-500 to get an army together.  True enough perhaps, and some of the chatter was that this was excessive compared to other activities, notably video gaming.

But is it really the money?  I think there's more to it than that.

 Snowboarding; by far the most expensive thing the author does; and a great way to break bones too!

After all, Wargaming on face value is much cheaper than many pastimes.  I spent £800 on a snowboarding holiday in December last year; for three days snowboarding.  I think in the last ten years, my addiction to snowboarding has cost me around £10,000; not to mention lost earnings whilst I took an 18 month sabbatical to do two seasons in France instead of making a living!  That is not a cheap hobby.

Other people opt for Scuba diving, collecting rare records, Parachuting, Hunting, Playing in Bands or Customising cars.  Their all far from inexpensive...

 You can spend hundreds of thousands to look this stupid going down the street. A Games Workshop carry case is a bargain by comparison!

The cost equation is in perceived returns; and these are more complicated to gauge.  My personal view is that Wargaming gives very poor return in terms of social currency whilst giving very good returns in personal currency.

I'll explain.  Pound for pound you get a lot from Wargaming; once purchased models have to be researched, cleaned, modified perhaps, painted and based.  This gives lots of activity in return to the initial outlay.  You have to produce scenery maybe, build a table even, find opponents, a club, so on and so on.  Once complete an army can be used for games pretty much forever.

 Never in the history of mankind have these resulted in a guy scoring with the opposite sex...

It however, provides one with no social cache.  Ever chatted to someone you didn't already know pretty well, or know was involved in gaming already about your wargames?  No of course not (well at least I haven't).  It isn't the sort of thing that impresses people.  It's not a basis for social climbing, it won't impress a woman, it doesn't improve your credibility with an employer.

 Yes, but he'll be crying all the way to the bank about it

And that is the crux of the argument, that is why I think gaming seems expensive to some people; because like comic book collecting for example it is something that only earns you respect with other people who already also appreciate it. 

You may be just as interesting, or otherwise, when talking about it as the next person talking about their football team's performance at the weekend or the new improvements they've made to their Evo 7.  But in the first place you would be hamstrung by the innate geekiness of the hobby; it is not for everyone, and that lack of approval devalues it to those not interested in it, where they can dislike golf, say, profoundly, but see it as an indicator of social status that wargaming would not be.

You may not agree, your experience may be different, and that's fine.  But I recognise in my own experience, that as much as I love wargaming, military history, painting and modelling - the whole shebang - if asked about what I do in my free time, I'll always, always lead with snowboarding.

Do I get more fun for my money from it than gaming?  Probably not, it's far more fleeting and a higher risk activity to boot.  But it also serves functions that wargaming won't. 

And that is part of the, unspoken value of a hobby.