PDA

View Full Version : Public Codex Review? Would it make the game better?



Robg54
20-11-2007, 15:48
I assume this has been brought up many times before, but I was wondering what people thought.

What would happen if GW released .PDF files of proposed rules changes 6 months before release to allow people to check for inconsistencies, miswording, ect. Usually, within a week after seeing a codex, people have found several things that need clarification or seem broken.

If they released a sample .PDF list with only the rules and NONE of the fluff or pictures or nice stuff we love in codexes, I seriously doubt it would prevent ANYONE from buying the book upon release, especially because the codex upon release would have been changed by the community to iron out any problems or poorly worded rules.

I think community feedback is very important and people on forums like Warseer ect, would probably do very well to make the books free of confusion.

I hate how loosely worded some rules are. I hate that the RAW seem to indicate that a model carrying a rapid fire weapon cannot assault after firng a gun in the shooting phase. If we could see this and review it, we'd be able say it should be worded "a unit which rapid fires may not assault in the same turn." or whatever way it fixes the stupid interpretation.

jfrazell
20-11-2007, 15:53
The codexes would be substantially better I know thats how experimental lists are done for EPIC (and BFG IIRC). Inconsistencies are spotted quickly.

What it would not do is help GW's codex strategy of making some units uber to sell them better (carnies looking in your direction).

Agrip. Varenus Denter
20-11-2007, 15:54
In a perfect world, that'd be nice.

With that said...

I think it'd grind the process to a screeching halt. What I like or don't, or what I question or don't is not always the same as someone else - a lot of people think it's fun to try and dump on GW just for kicks, so I would imagine that about 2 hours after this was theoretically done GW would regret it.

Bloodknight
20-11-2007, 15:55
I reckon nobody would buy the codex for the fluff, at least nobody who has been longer in the game - most of the stuff in the new codices is just regurgitated old material.

Proposing rules and have them checked might be a good idea but then the internet is probably not the greatest place to do it - people who like stuff and say it are a minority. You are far more likely to only get flak from different sides.
What GW needs is a bunch of rules lawyers and people capable of powergaming with a genuine interest in making the game balanced.
I do not think their developers are up to the task of playtesting the rules properly - not because they cannot play but because they are too nice.

Zerosoul
20-11-2007, 15:57
Yeah, no. GW's codex sales would take a nosedive. It's a silly idea and won't happen. If they did that, they might as well just switch to giving codices out for free.


What it would not do is help GW's codex strategy of making some units uber to sell them better (carnies looking in your direction).

You mean like Chaos Lords, Possessed, and Spawn? Those new plastic kits - all pretty uber, right?

lord_blackfang
20-11-2007, 15:59
It would help the game immensely. Come on, any half-literate Slovenian could spot the kind of typos and rules issues that get past GW's "proofreaders."


You mean like Chaos Lords, Possessed, and Spawn? Those new plastic kits - all pretty uber, right?

lol, exactly what I was going to say.

scarletsquig
20-11-2007, 16:01
Crocodile games uses this method to ensure a solid balanced ruleset, with a good amount of success.

Urban Mammoth also pre-released their flagship game "Metropolis" in .pdf form 2 weeks before it went to print. The people on their forums picked up on a lot of errors which were corrected before the book went to the printers. :)

Adiem
20-11-2007, 16:03
Couldn't GW just take a slice of the 40K community, and have them beta test the codex, in much the same way as computer games often are? Legally,it's not difficult to get people to sign a secrecy agreement, and although these obviously aren't 100% effective it would be far better than releasing to the public at large. It seems to me like a good compromise between the need for secrecy, and the need for a more rigorous and in-depth testing method for new codexes.

jfrazell
20-11-2007, 16:10
It would help the game immensely. Come on, any half-literate Slovenian could spot the kind of typos and rules issues that get past GW's "proofreaders."



lol, exactly what I was going to say.

hey I didn't say they were perfect at it ;)

*Like assault cannons, terminators, and 9 A cannon skimmers in the new marine codex
*Like elite fexxes and Nidzilla in general.
*Like Tzeentch and 1K Sons


Couldn't GW just take a slice of the 40K community, and have them beta test the codex, in much the same way as computer games often are? Legally,it's not difficult to get people to sign a secrecy agreement, and although these obviously aren't 100% effective it would be far better than releasing to the public at large. It seems to me like a good compromise between the need for secrecy, and the need for a more rigorous and in-depth testing method for new codexes.

Agreed, if nothing else then to catch spelling errors and potential rules issues so they can be re-written to be clear. For example, the bolter vs. bolt pistol issue for DA's. It should have been caught that there was going to be uncertainty about how that works.

Adiem
20-11-2007, 16:21
Or the carnifex barbed strangler shenanigans; that annoys me every time I make a list!

Stingray_tm
20-11-2007, 16:24
The problem is not the lack of QA when developing codizes. The real problem is, that GW simply refuses to publish FAQs

Custard
20-11-2007, 16:24
........add on another 6 months to the release date.

Can you imagine how many people are gonna chime in with their comments??

EmperorEternalXIX
20-11-2007, 16:29
I assume this has been brought up many times before, but I was wondering what people thought.

What would happen if GW released .PDF files of proposed rules changes 6 months before release to allow people to check for inconsistencies, miswording, ect. Usually, within a week after seeing a codex, people have found several things that need clarification or seem broken.

If they released a sample .PDF list with only the rules and NONE of the fluff or pictures or nice stuff we love in codexes, I seriously doubt it would prevent ANYONE from buying the book upon release, especially because the codex upon release would have been changed by the community to iron out any problems or poorly worded rules.

I think community feedback is very important and people on forums like Warseer ect, would probably do very well to make the books free of confusion.

I hate how loosely worded some rules are. I hate that the RAW seem to indicate that a model carrying a rapid fire weapon cannot assault after firng a gun in the shooting phase. If we could see this and review it, we'd be able say it should be worded "a unit which rapid fires may not assault in the same turn." or whatever way it fixes the stupid interpretation. I see only one flaw with all this.

Rules for free = 80% of the community never wanting to buy a codex again.

Like it or not the money we spend helps to keep the game alive. Maybe I am in the minority but anything that endangers profitability for Warhammer 40k is something I have to say I'm against.

wickedvoodoo
20-11-2007, 16:30
Yeah, no. GW's codex sales would take a nosedive. It's a silly idea and won't happen. If they did that, they might as well just switch to giving codices out for free.

I thought GW regularly made losses on books anyway??

The way i was told it, they accept a small loss on each codex because each one is accompanied by a bunch of mini releases, the real money makers.

Plus look at what happened with the new orks, anyone who knows how to use the internet is only a few clicks away from it. If GW had released it early themselves, as a kind of beta, they could have gotten feedback, and then released a hard copy of a book that is better playtested.

Besides people will (usually) still buy a codex for an army they play even if they downloaded the leaked version, its so much easier to take to the game club or the shop or whatever. I have all the books electronically, but any which i actually make an army from, i buy a hard copy.

Robg54
20-11-2007, 16:32
Actually, I was hoping it would be released while the codex was in the process of being released.

Would it be better if it was just 2 or 3 weeks. I suppose we don't need nearly 6 months to find rules inconsistencies, and it's not really supposed to be general game play review. I think it'd be sorta bad to have people reviewing the power of respective choices... The it becomes people saying stuff is too weak and others crying cheese.

Ironhand
20-11-2007, 16:34
It would certainly not make the game any better. It would simply give the power gamers a chance to butcher each Codex.

OTOH, if they did that the Eldar might finally get their Rending Ponies :)

Gorbad Ironclaw
20-11-2007, 16:34
Couldn't GW just take a slice of the 40K community, and have them beta test the codex, in much the same way as computer games often are?


There are external playtesters, both for 40k and WFB.


Edit: As for deliberatly making units over/under powered. If you think about it, it makes very little sense. Yes, you might sell more of one kit then, but there will be another handful kits you are selling less of. If you make options equal, you will likely sell more in the end, as people will want those options, rather than just the best one.

Galaspar
20-11-2007, 16:38
In principle I'd like to see more customer feedback going into codexes, and yes, it would most likely help avoid spelling mistakes and ambiguity. However, the main thing seperating 40k from other games is the mass audience, and we can be a demanding, argumentative mass at that. If codexes were put up for public feedback, it would take a large GW team just to sort through thousands of comments, and sort the useful input from the inevitable whines and wishlists. If GW were to hire an extra team, I think their time would be better spent working on the book itself.

The 'beta-testing' idea would work a lot better IMHO, using a mix of store staff, gaming club network people, and other gamers chosen by lottery. Tournament winners as well, maybe?

Stingray_tm
20-11-2007, 16:39
There are external playtesters, both for 40k and WFB.

Maybe. But GW doesn't care what they say.

Bunnahabhain
20-11-2007, 16:40
If it was done well, it would make the game much better. However, it would be easy for GW to make a total hash of it.

A pdf of the army list and rules, with a huge great water mark across every single page announcing that's it's the pre release codex v1.3, and the release date of the actual codex would make most people get round to buying the codex at some point.

Robg54
20-11-2007, 16:45
Plus, I don't think any page should have artwork or anything, just the plain text rules. an possibly a large watermark saying unofficial beta so you couldn't bring it anywhere but the friendliest of games without looking like a tool. Plus, as the rules would hopefully be improved by release, it would be old rules as well.

You think many people would play with a crappy looking plain list of outdated rules that cearly state they are unofficial who would have otherwise bought the codex?

Zerosoul
20-11-2007, 17:04
I thought GW regularly made losses on books anyway??

Probably. But the sales of the books themselves offset those losses to some degree that would be decreased massively. After all - if I can have a legal, electronic version of a codex I can print out, what kind of idiot would I have to be to go out and spend $15-$20 on one just for pictures of models and some stupid fluff I'll get told by my friends at the shop anyway?


Besides people will (usually) still buy a codex for an army they play even if they downloaded the leaked version, its so much easier to take to the game club or the shop or whatever. I have all the books electronically, but any which i actually make an army from, i buy a hard copy.

Anecdotally, no, they won't. Some clubs facilitate this behavior. I'm not naming any names and won't, but I know some clubs print out copies of the books themselves for the regs to browse, and I know of no club that actually requires printed books. This may be because I live a couple hundred miles from an official GW store, but I would imagine that people actually playing in GW stores is a smaller percentage of players than people playing in their basements or at independent hobby stores.

I look at it this way. The only thing keeping me from downloading a copy of Apocalypse and going to town with it is my sense that it's morally wrong. Codices are similar. If I print out a copy of a codex, and, if questioned, say "Oh, I just had to scan it and have it spiral bound because my original was falling apart", then I don't know of anyone who's going to stop me. Maybe in an official GW tourney or at a GW store, but I don't play there - I play in my basement or at independent stores who are tolerant at worst of piracy.

Nah. It's a silly idea, and I find the notion that if only GW would turn the books over to the teeming masses they would be PERFECT to be exceedingly silly, anyway.


Maybe. But GW doesn't care what they say.

So are you going to cut out the heightened state of agitation any time soon, or are you just going to be indignant all over the forums? Just need to know for my ignore list's sake.

Pokpoko
20-11-2007, 17:18
Nah. It's a silly idea, and I find the notion that if only GW would turn the books over to the teeming masses they would be PERFECT to be exceedingly silly, anyway.they wouldn't be perfect. they would,however,be free of all the little,irritating mistakes and badly worder rules. rackahm previews their armylists and rules. Urban Mammoth does it. Corvus belli posted the entire beta rulebook(without the fluff) and all the army lists for free. even GW does it in some of their specialist games. it can be done,and it is done in many instances. the constant aloofness of GW developers when it comes to that is starting to look silly in that context. especially if it also takes ages for them to release a page of FAQ's.

Gazak Blacktoof
20-11-2007, 17:34
If codexes were put up for public feedback, it would take a large GW team just to sort through thousands of comments, and sort the useful input from the inevitable whines and wishlists. If GW were to hire an extra team, I think their time would be better spent working on the book itself.

I don't think it would require that many people and if the codex comes out better for it and there's less whining they should do well out of it, gamers certainly would be better off.

It would be simple I think to release the PDF to several forums like this one as well as the some or all of their stores and ask them to compile the feedback for submission to the studio. That would dramatically cut down on the volume of information they would have to analyse.

The way I would structure it would be in 3 stages.

1. The "finished" codex is sent out with a request for feedback on rules clarity ONLY. This should require no more than 2 weeks plus turnaround time in the studio.

2. The edited version is then redistributed for balance issues. A solid month of play testing should be enough to identify glaring weaknesses and overly powerful units. At this stage any last rules issues should show up easily as people will have had the codex for 7-8 weeks.

3. If there is a major re-write of any rules the codex is again submitted for public review with the balance issues resolved. Probably another 2 weeks in the public domain should resolve any final issues before the studio has one last check over of the work and finalises the format for printing.

12 weeks give or take.

Lord Raneus
20-11-2007, 17:38
It's a nice idea in practice, but given the huge amount of whinging just about things we don't even know, it might not work out.

Then again, it could have helped prevent fiascos like the Assualt Cannon or the Falcon's upgrades. Perhaps GW should give this a try with one book and see how it works. :)

Baneboss
20-11-2007, 17:39
Every great idea always have its enemies. Just like here. People always cry about big prices GW has and what do I see here? Worrying about GW sales... People, PEOPLE! I CRY OUT LOUD!!!

Anyway I think its a great idea. Codexes will be better balanced and despite what you all think gamers will still buy codexes. Why? Because early alpha stage of the list and final codex will have a lot of fixes and balance changes.

If it doesnt cost you a penny and entire community benefits why are you against it?

IJW
20-11-2007, 17:46
Actually, I was hoping it would be released while the codex was in the process of being released.

Would it be better if it was just 2 or 3 weeks. I suppose we don't need nearly 6 months to find rules inconsistencies, and it's not really supposed to be general game play review.
Given that the lead time on printing plus distribution can be several months you can forget any ideas about it happening a few weeks before the codexes hit the shelves.

EDIT - not that I think public beta testing is a bad idea (quite the opposite), but there's no practical way that it could happen on shortly before the army release.

Torga_DW
20-11-2007, 19:51
I don't think it would be a good idea. What gw really needs to do is improve the quality of its current testers. They should be picking this stuff up, after all, its what they're getting paid for.

BrainFireBob
20-11-2007, 20:01
I also don't think it will work. Who creates the consensus? Each major forum has different visions of what the game should be. There are forums with a Warmachine approach, fluff-centered forums, etc. If GW listens to all of them, we'll have fluffy rending ponies.

Gazak Blacktoof
20-11-2007, 20:03
I find the replies in this thread quite astounding.

--Would you like to help design the rules and steer the direction of your hobby?

--No I'll leave it to the professionals.:rolleyes:


In my mind gamers are people who like to tinker with the rules. Being able to do so and having it put in print should make you all go giggly like school girls and be in danger of falling on top of your lovingly painted models from all the swooning.

Brother Siccarius
20-11-2007, 20:06
I assume this has been brought up many times before, but I was wondering what people thought.

What would happen if GW released .PDF files of proposed rules changes 6 months before release to allow people to check for inconsistencies, miswording, ect. Usually, within a week after seeing a codex, people have found several things that need clarification or seem broken.

If they released a sample .PDF list with only the rules and NONE of the fluff or pictures or nice stuff we love in codexes, I seriously doubt it would prevent ANYONE from buying the book upon release, especially because the codex upon release would have been changed by the community to iron out any problems or poorly worded rules.

I think community feedback is very important and people on forums like Warseer ect, would probably do very well to make the books free of confusion.

I hate how loosely worded some rules are. I hate that the RAW seem to indicate that a model carrying a rapid fire weapon cannot assault after firng a gun in the shooting phase. If we could see this and review it, we'd be able say it should be worded "a unit which rapid fires may not assault in the same turn." or whatever way it fixes the stupid interpretation.

And if they did then people who played other armies than the one shown would complain vehemently about it being good against their particular set up or army, and a few fringe people who played the army would complain voraciously as well about loosing one or two of their favorite things in the army, saying it ruined the army.

Basically, you'd get what happens now anyways when the codexies are "leaked" ahead of time.
You'd get maybe one or two people actually mentioning wording problems like you suggested, like we do now, but they'd be buried so far in the random complaints, as they are now, they you'd have to try and dig like a gold miner to find them, like you do now.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to go through a codex ahead of time and point out the various problems with it, but the above would happen as a certainty if it were a public forum for problems in the codex. Perhaps a smaller crowd of certain gamers would be better.

And as Irony as my favorite subject, I noticed a few on here who've complained loudly on certain codexies and army books, who now wouldn't like a crack at it before it came in.

Nkari
20-11-2007, 20:17
The community will sort itself out, if you could rate individual posts in a thread it will be easy for say GW to spot the important posts vs the spam..

Aaron
20-11-2007, 20:38
In the software industry, public betas are common-place. Whether it be games like Dawn of War or more serious software like Windows Vista. It's always worked wonders for games like Blood Bowl.

Let's remember that once upon a time, Citadel (a miniatures company) bought out Games Workshop (a rules book company). GW make their money on models, not books. As long as they worded the copyright notice properly, there's no financial risk in releasing beta rules early.

I guess the only concern would be whether GW would have the resources to sift through all of the feedback. I'm sure there would be a high signal-to-noise ratio.

Mr Zephy
20-11-2007, 20:59
Open beta has very few drawbacks. If it did, it wouldn't be done by some of the most successful companies in many areas.

And as to people who worry about fluffy vs. "Warmachiney"

If a codex is balanced, there will no longer be the problem of optimised lists beating themed ones, as all the choices will pull their weight.

The Orange
20-11-2007, 22:32
I'd say it would be a good thing. Sure it's a lot of crap GW would have to go through, but at the end of they day, they can still choose to ignore issues that players gripe on (i.e. ignore people claiming something is too powerful, etc.). GW still has the final word on all issues. At the very least, loopholes or unclear rules will be identified and GW can reword them to make their intent clearer. Instead of waiting ages to get to an issue that only gets talked about on these unofficial forums. (Seriously why don't they have any official way to send rules questions, other then calling into their rules boys or mail order?)

The only problem I see is that some players may just stick to playing with the pdf instead of buying the codex. But then it's not like those players aren't stopped from doing that now, are they? (free rules summary on the GW sites, illegal pdf's floating around) And in the end what will really matter is the difference between the pdf and the revised codex (complete overhauls of units/rules, etc.). If their are enough real changes, then I'm sure most players will consider the pdf's crap and junk them. Does anyone really try to get away with using the FW pdf's after the official rules have been release? Maybe but I wouldn't think enough to be a serious problem. And I honestly buy codices for the fluff too.

max the dog
20-11-2007, 22:33
I love the idea but it would take some serious GW management changes that they're obviously not willing to do now. Not to mention some of the posters brought up some very good points that all it would do was give out free codex's and give power gamers a chance to buff up their favorite army.
Being in management myself I could see a few way to fix all of those problems but it involves (cursed) meetings, lots and lots of meetings. This is what I would do, have GW recruit experts and unbiased community members who could give them good input and advice. The experts I would define as experienced writers who've already gone through the process of writing a codex and rule book. Unbiased community would be 40K club leaders who have more than 2-3 armies and a good background knowledge of the game spanning many editions. Have the writers and the community work TOGETHER to come up with changes based upon known problems. Send the community out to their clubs to playtest various possible changes and then later report TOGETHER on the results. Review what worked and what didn't then repeat the entire process. Have the experts troll the message boards to listen to reactions in the rumor posts on what people really think. Convene another meeting where all the info is compiled and all points considered. Redo until a fair balance is achieved.
Don't release pdf's of the rules to have the public spellcheck them. Send out a few of the experts who worked on the process with a basic "tentative rules only" codex in a binder to club meetings, tournaments, etc... and have them ask typical power gamers to look at it and see if they could make an unbeatable list. If they can then make changes until it's fair and balanced.
Send out limited version .05 pre-release codex's to stores to get feedback. Make additional changes and then finally release the finished product. I'd call it a min. 2 year process if done right.
But don't believe me, I only work in managment.

Corax
21-11-2007, 05:52
This whole question of betas and so forth seems to have rather missed the key underlying problem here. That is, that at the moment, GW does a pathetic job of writing, editing, test and publishing their books. They have shown time and again that when given the opportunity to write a codex, they will find some way to balls it up! (Pete Haines, I'm looking at you!)

Based solely on past history, the introduction of some form of wider testing prior to release is surely necessary. Having the testing done in-house by the people who write the book is like marrying your cousin - its convenient and it keeps things all in the family, but you end up spawning a misbegotten deformed mutant as a result (sometimes referred to as a 'codex')!

Many other games (ccgs mainly) have groups of veteran players (who are under confidentiality agreements), who are given several months to attempt to break the new rules and highlight flaws in the mechanics. There is no reason why GW couldn't do a similar thing. Open beta testing is probably not required, as long as you have a decent pool of clued up people in your testing group. They could even do open beta testing, and then change the point values (or some other small but important change) ever so slightly for the final version, so that people would still have to get the codex for the official version. Personally, I don't really think this is much of an issue. If people don't want to buy a codex, they will just xerox/photocopy it anyway. Most people will still buy the codex for the convenience and the pretty pictures regardless of whether there is a .pdf out there or not.

Of course, it would also help if GW were to actually listen to the playtesters...

IJW
21-11-2007, 09:50
Many other games (ccgs mainly) have groups of veteran players (who are under confidentiality agreements), who are given several months to attempt to break the new rules and highlight flaws in the mechanics. There is no reason why GW couldn't do a similar thing.
GW already have external playtesters. :(

f2k
21-11-2007, 10:53
Open beta testing is probably not required, as long as you have a decent pool of clued up people in your testing group.

You need both. The clueless players tell you whether or not you have written the rules in a clear and easy to understand language. The veterans tell you whether or not the rules actually work.

As a student of computer science, I have often used my mother as test-subject when I've written a new program. She's slightly worse at using a computer than the average user and that makes her perfect for testing GUIs. If she can use the program, then anyone (at least, those who know how to turn on a computer) can use it.
On the other hand, I also ask other students to test it as well. I need to test whether or not the program actually performs as I intended and doesn't have any major flaws...

Consider this example:

I tell the user: “Please enter a number between 1 and 10”.

My mother might enter “7” the first time. Then, trying to be cleaver, she’ll enter “11” the next time – just to see what happens. A fellow student, on the other hand, would probably enter “eleven”.
The difference is that “11” might make the program behave strangely while “eleven” would crash it. My mother would never enter “eleven” because it said “enter a number” while the student would never enter “11” because “eleven” would be a must better test of the programs capabilities.

Man, I’m ranting here. Forgive me, but user testing is, in my humble opinion, at the same time the most important, and the most neglected, thing in computer science.

So, in conclusion: Games Workshop needs to release beta versions of their rules to anyone who’re willing to use them. Because, in the end, both the still-wet-behind-the-ears-beginner and the I-helped-write-Rouge-Trader-veteran have valuable input to give.

Only problem is, as have been mentioned on this thread, that Games Workshop just isn’t willing to listen to critique…

catbarf
21-11-2007, 11:28
Yeah, no. GW's codex sales would take a nosedive. It's a silly idea and won't happen. If they did that, they might as well just switch to giving codices out for free.

Go take a look at the Japanese website. They give out the codices for free.

Gaebriel
21-11-2007, 11:55
Yeah, no. GW's codex sales would take a nosedive. It's a silly idea and won't happen. If they did that, they might as well just switch to giving codices out for free. ...


...
Rules for free = 80% of the community never wanting to buy a codex again.

Like it or not the money we spend helps to keep the game alive. Maybe I am in the minority but anything that endangers profitability for Warhammer 40k is something I have to say I'm against.
Technically, GW doesn't make it's majority of money with their print publications. If they remodelled their internal ressource distribution they could give way rules for free as a loss leader. Or they could hand out .pdfs and sell hardcopies via a print-on-demand model - next to no production costs. And better game systems will more likely draw more customers and offset the development price.

Though I don't see why they shouldn't sell any rulebooks, as the first sent out .pdf will be most likely incorrect by the time the book arrives.

All in all, I think the concept of a beta would be great. It does wonders for the computer game industry, and honestly - GW could use a better evaluation of their product.

Will we see it? I don't think so - GW is a miniature company, not a games company. The game was initially designed around the models. They do not care enough to leave their established way in that regards.

TheBigBadWolf
21-11-2007, 11:56
Its a bad idea public beta testing no one would buy the codex's. The current setup means you have to buy the codex regardles if it shoddy or not. GW doesnt care that you think the rules or spelling is abit iffy, if they liked the idea of beta testing they would have kept their own forums going but they were sick of the whinning at every available moment so they shut it down that very action shows what their reaction to beta testing would be.

jfrazell
21-11-2007, 12:19
No it doesn't. I haven't bought a codex since the horror of DA.

f2k
21-11-2007, 12:47
Having a beta is avaliable doesn't mean that there's no reason to buy the final product. The final product will probably not be the same as the beta, having final tweaks of the rules and points as well as fluff and pretty pictures...

Master Jeridian
21-11-2007, 13:08
No it doesn't. I haven't bought a codex since the horror of DA.

Ditto, though admittedly there's only been the Chaos Codex since and I may just stump up the money for the Ork Codex.

I agree wholeheartedly that Beta testing needs to be done on a Codex, by people other than the designers.
This isn't a dig at the Codex writers- it's not smart for any designer to be the tester for their own product. They usually have a set 'idea' of what they 'want' from the product and will aim towards that idea...rather than independent testers testing the whole thing.

This is painfully obvious in the White Dwarf batrep army choices- so poor.

The other obvious is- "We didn't expect people to take 2 Lash princes..."
That's because you didn't let other's playtest.

It is embarassing because most gamers (at least everyone I knew, and good chunk of the online community) found the Lash after a few minutes reading, and similar in other Codex's. If these overpowered or ambigious items where tucked far away in a Codex and only noticed weeks or months after release by some particularly filthy power gamer, then fair do's. But they slap you in the face as soon as you open the book.

lanrak
21-11-2007, 18:27
Hi all.
All I can say is I realy object to paying money for codexes that have obvious spelling and gramatical mistakes.
Not to mention the actual game play issues!
Now we know the dev teams have to be more instep with marketing requirments than gameplay issues.
But a selection of well respected experianced and TRUSTED players to review the 'new codex' a few weeks before going to print HAS GOT to improve quality of the codexes.

I agree that opening up a discusion on an intended codex content to the world at large is not going to be of any great benifit.

However as GW PLC seems only to be interested in 'selling toy soldiers to kiddies,'at the moment.
If this atitude continues,then the gaming part of the 'GW Hobby' will probably keep on deteriating.

But I realy hope they wake up and realise without proper SUPPORT for GWs actual games, not many folk will keep purchacing GW minis.

TTFN
Lanrak.

dcikgyurt
21-11-2007, 20:28
All I can say is that as SM players are in the majority, any testing would see armour 10 chaos landraiders and every marine having rending both when they shot with their S10 ap1 gun and when they assaulted at I10 with S10 power weapons. I'm sorry, GW listen to the public a little too much already and THAT was what led to the chaos codex only being slightly fixed, rather than being given the treatment it deserved. Yes it is the best codex to date, but there is so much they didn't do that they should have that I'm still not satisfied with it.

Cry of the Wind
21-11-2007, 20:47
I think you're being a little too harsh on the public there dcikgyurt, I'm sure if more public testing was done it would be pretty easy to filter out the 12 year old space marine players comments.

Rather than have everyone in the public be able to beta test I'd limit it to certain players such as GT winners and also to general retail staff. I know there is a lot of hate for the redshirts (or what ever colour they are in your area now) but generally speaking they are all people with a love of the hobby and won't just have a knee-jerk reaction to stuff.

As I understand it they already have outside players do some play testing. The problem comes down to what impact they really have had and even if they are listened to there is always the problem of the writer thinking something works one way but writes it working differently or too grey to be understood.

My biggest problems with the books are the grey rules and typos. These things should be checked thoroughly before going to print and yet there are errors and grey areas all over the place and obvious on first reading of a new codex. Balance issues aside if I don't really understand what my stuff actually is supposed to do how am I supposed to play it properly?

BrPrometheus
21-11-2007, 20:50
GW does have outside playtesters. It is a very tight group from what I understand and tied very closely to the development staff. The issue I have is that the GW staff are "Hobbyists" they love all aspects of the hobby the painting, the modeling, the sitting around and shooting the sh..t with your buddies, and the gaming is only a small aspect of the hobby as a whole. The problem lies in the fact that as they are of this oppinion they naturally recruit people that of are the same oppinions to test codeci. So what has been happening for quite some time is a bunch of hobbyists playtesting a portion of the hobby that they do not weight as much as most of us on these forums or tournament attendees. Now I would say that GW has made an attempt to balance the lists and I for one appluad the effort. The last series of codeci to be released have largely been balanced for the game as a whole. The issue I have with the recent releases is the lack of clarity and simplicity. Something written by a few people and tested by a few people will always have issues when exposed to a much wider audience. GW's complete lack of support for FAQ's is a severe negative. In order to support balance they have started to simplify there codexes again (ork rumors withstanding) because they are unwilling or unable to test all of the permutations they simplify the codex. This has been the largest cry I have heard from chaos players. I for one enjoy the large diversity of units and options but hate when combos are created that are game breaking. I would go play priveteer press games if that was my bent. I believe that an answer to this delima is a broader play teasting group than they already have. They need to expand it into a group of tournament players from a bunch of different countries. Expanding it into the internet will not work becuase it would be nigh impossible to sort through all of the gibberish comments to reach the real issues. But a small core group of tournament players testing rules and playability while another group of hobbyists test from thier side would balance it well. It would allow the writers to expand the complexity of the codeci without worrying too much about breaking the game or the hobby. These groups could be formed so that issues were accurately reported and organized for a quick read by the development staff.

This is my hope. There are some combinations that still find there way into codeci becuase someone didn't think of them and there are some cases where a little more diversity would have been really nice.