PDA

View Full Version : UK White Dwarf 316 Feedback



Avian
21-03-2006, 13:53
Since my local store now has this issue (I'll wait until one of my friends buy it, the last ones haven't been worth it), I'm starting this tread.

EvC
21-03-2006, 16:29
...do GW stores generally sell White Dwarf earlier than other places?

Insane Psychopath
21-03-2006, 20:40
I'll vite as soon as I get my copy on Fri


EvC ...do GW stores generally sell White Dwarf earlier than other places?

No, just GW get there copy in now..ish. But those who have the one year mail order or 2 year, we tend get it a week early... other wise it last Fri of the month which is the 31st March.

IP

Grimtuff
21-03-2006, 21:49
I'll vote when my copy turns up on Friday

plus depending upon which store is in the Necro(astro)nomicon will determine my bias ;)

Satan
22-03-2006, 20:25
I vote 9 actually. Though I don't play any of the armies featured, But I thought it was great, and though some may view the giant feature as a sales advert, it made me want to get one for my WE (which I can't) so I'd say it worked a charm.

The battle report (Empire vs Orcs), though still a bit simplistic, worked too, but there should've been a clear turn-based structure IMO. It lacked the excitement somehow.

The Standard Bearer was good, and really made me view the future of this hobby with a positive eye.

Tau parts: Vehicle feature ok, check. Vespids - way too short. I want the old index xenos back. The expanded rants which andy chambers and others wrote on subjects which all of us thought were already defined (such as the LatD). Good show with alternative colours, but it really needed expanding, the article didn't tell us enough about the vespids in-depth, and without depth, this game loses it's credibility.

The "Fall of Medusa V"-part was too much of a sales advert. You really did not need that hype, since you're already going to have a campagin booklet accompanying the next issue of WD. Waste of space in my humble opinion.

Tallarns: Good article, and just the right amount length-wise. Why the heck didn't you show the rough riders from forgeworld though?! It would've made more sense. Shame on you.

The artwork-based conversions were really great, more of that please, an innovative way to use different bitz from the plastic and metallic sets goes a long way. Really great.

'Eavy Metal feature on LotR: Not so great. You should've shown fewer models and gone into much more detail about how the painters' went about their buisiness. No real painting tips here, sorry, but this lacked effective content.
The rest of the LotR-section wasn't so great either, was fun reading about the hero suggestions though, I think you ought to have expanded on that instead of just showcasing some parts of the studios' armies.

Dok butcha and hobby section, worked very well. But I'm asking if you coudln't please increase Butcha and give him another page? More conversions, I think that's what really appeals to us "veterans". I always really look forward to the Butcha section, to see if they've made any conversions form the armies I play every month (Sadly you haven't) but I think they make great tips for how to build highly detailed models for dioramas and competitions. Please, I'd really, really like to see more of this.

Mordheim: I think this installment actually brought justice to the Specialist games feature. I'm pleased with it, sure I'd like it to be a few pages longer, and include some more content not necessarily associated with the campaign, maybe just articles picked off the specialist games' website, but I suppose I can't have it all. There's room for improvement here though I think.

Astronomican: I think it's good that you're showing off models that aren't always up to 'eavy metal standard, just to show the kids that are into the hobby, and those who aren't expert painters, that not everyone paints like that. It might sound silly to you and me, but 13-year olds don't work like you or me. They need this type of confirmation.

All in all, I'm satisfied, but I think one or two of my points makes for a valid base to use for future improvements. I'll wait until next issue before I start fund-raising to have a bouquette(sp?) sent to the White Dwarf office though, as I've promised earlier.

And I took the Cambridge ESoL-test and finished A+... still my english grammar has gone down the drain.

Pertinax
22-03-2006, 20:34
...do GW stores generally sell White Dwarf earlier than other places?
Avian's local store is an independent stockest. Basically, they got their stuff in well before release day.

Fabiusbile
23-03-2006, 07:40
I wonder because noone seems to mention it : In the german Issue there are about 10 pages of rules for naval battles.I really liked those ;). Are those rules present in the UK as well?

Pertinax
23-03-2006, 19:54
No, they are not there.

Skaven Lord Vinshqueek
24-03-2006, 08:42
Feck, if this is going to be the way White Dwarf is going to promote Specialist Games, I'd rather not seeing it coming back at all. Sorry, but this third (last?) article was complete rubbish... Two/ three pages talking about some scenario, which apparently ended the GW HQ campaign. No battle reports, no photo's, no nothing! Why, in St. Pete's name, do they say "Hey, we're going to promote Mordheim" and then not even give it space in the White Dwarf to do so properly? Sorry to say so, but this one is seriously why I (as a Specialist Gamer) don't wish to buy the White Dwarf anymore... And off course, am counting down towards the moment when my subscription ends.

Greetz

Avian
24-03-2006, 08:46
Having borrowed the issue from a friend, here is my verdict:

Rubbish, 2/10


Layout more messy with less separation of the different sections. More ads mixed in with the articles and most annoyingly effectively nothing that's not the flavour of the month.
It's possible that this is the issue that I needed the shortest time to read through ever.

News section
- 20 pages of ads

Warhammer
- Giant, nothing more. Painted pics of the components is nice, but otherwise nothing interesting.
- Doesn't mention that the rules for the DoW Giant is official or not. Since Gav said a few issues ago that WD content was to be regarded as unofficial unless stated otherwise, are we to assume this is the case here as well?
- Battlereport is two guys goofing around. Presumably more fun to fight than it was to read. Army selection and tactics as you would expect

Standard bearer
- If Jervis doesn't know how computer-aided design works, have someone else write about it!

40K
- beginners article on assembling and painting tau tanks
- I started reading the Vespid background article, flipped the page to continue reading it, thought I must have flipped over two pages in one go, flipped back and realised that I had not. That was the entire article, little more than one page of text. :mad:
- Ads for Medusa V
- Ads for Forge World's Taros book + a bit about Tallarns (nothing interesting)

The one thing Avian liked in the whole mag
- some schweet converted empire models (I swear Dave Taylor has a bunch of oompa loompas locked in his basement). Very nice, though demonstrates how out of proportion the zombie hands are ;)

More ads

LotR
- I searched through the mag a couple of times before it dawned on me that this was actually the LotR section. LotR-haters rejoice, for there is practically no content.
- three pages of pics of painted models you have seen before, more ads and four sample armies

DoK Butcha
- meh (even though I am an ogre player myself)

Building battlefields
- I originally had high hopes for this, since a gaming table of my own is high on my priority list. Sadly it was rather uninspired, followed by
- more ads

Mordheim
- pretty dull, though the ruined temple (while completely wrong for a Morr temple) was nice


Astronomican
- 28 pages of ads and badly painted models. The letters page no longer has letters, which is just as well, considering the quality of the previous ones.
- it must be said that the new plastic LotR wood elves and the sentinels are horrible model


Could have been worse, but not a lot worse.

Osbad
24-03-2006, 09:19
Sounds like the usual total lack of content that we have got used to over the past few months. It seems to now qualify as the most expensive piece of junkmail on the planet.

Well, mine is due through the letterbox this morning and I am simply not interested. It doesn't seem so long ago that the day WD arrived was a highspot in the month. Now it has become so much crappy junk mail - consigned to the bin along with the loan offers and stairlift ads...

Thanks GW, thanks a lot for taking what used to be a good product and turning it into a pile of steaming dreck! Will the downward spiral ever end?

I have in my hands the latest "Cry Havoc" and the latest "No Quarter". I also recently downloaded the latest issue of "Fictional Reality". It is my plan to do a comparative review and demonstrate just how far behind the competition Gee-Dub have fallen.

The Judge
24-03-2006, 10:13
Sounds like a real quality issue.

I may have to start buying No Quarter or Cry Havoc, they sound interesting, if not superior.

Osbad
24-03-2006, 12:45
Just spotted something. WD 316 is 20 pages shorter than 315. What gives?

75hastings69
24-03-2006, 13:11
:mad: Even the paper quality was crap this month, not just the content!!!! :mad:

3/10 from me, WD just seems to be getting worse every month.

To save time slagging off the bit's I didn't like (loads of them!) here is a list of stuff that I thought was OK (but by no means great!)...

1. The Golden Demon 2005 winners (although it is about quater the size of last years!!!!)
2. The Picture on Page 105 of the converted Savage Orc Shaman.
3. and..... erm...... oh well looks like that's it!! can i change my vote to 2/10?

Insane Psychopath
24-03-2006, 14:39
75hastings69

Even the paper quality was crap this month, not just the content!!!!

http://uk.games-workshop.com/features/wd-corrections/wd-corrections.htm

I belive you will find the answer here.

I just want to see more cool converted armies as well as more tournament reports.

IP

Hlokk
24-03-2006, 15:05
Isnt Owen on record somewhere as saying this was supposed to be the issue where we first noticed WD turning itself around? Something to do with WD as a tanker or something

Wintermute
24-03-2006, 17:45
Just spotted something. WD 316 is 20 pages shorter than 315. What gives?

Simple. Its has less pages because it comes bundled with the Golden Demon 2005 Winners supplement. GW have to cover the cost of the supplement somehow and this has been done by reducing the number of pages in the main product.

BTW the GD supplement is printed on the same paper stock as WD316, and it looks dreadful.

Brandir
24-03-2006, 18:08
Extremely disappointed with the quality of the paper used to print the Golden Demon 2005 Winners booklet. Horrible cheap reflective paper that just doesn't allow one to view the models well.

The rest of the magazine. Hmmm. To me it did seem a cut and paste job; I am sure I have seen most of those articles before in either books, the web or previous issues. They were just incredibly boring articles accompanied by uninspiring images.

Sorry GW, but after few good issues we have just received one of the poorest I can remember since I began subscribing with issue 17.

Grimtuff
24-03-2006, 18:36
Rather uninspiring issue TBH.

I could not really put my finger no it, but a LOT was lacking from this issue, sure there may have been some content to speak of. But it was all the same old tosh...

What use is content when it goes on TEH NEEEW GIIANTT UBAAAR!!!!111!ONE! and yet more pushing of Tau.

looks like the supertanker just ran aground :rolleyes:

Grimtuff
24-03-2006, 19:04
- Doesn't mention that the rules for the DoW Giant is official or not.

Nor does it mention the issue about it's new base, are we to assume Giants have their own basing category in 7th ed?

Hlokk
25-03-2006, 10:58
Grim, are your models in this issue then?

Cherrystone
25-03-2006, 11:04
I could not really put my finger no it, but a LOT was lacking from this issue, sure there may have been some content to speak of.

I can, its the lack of TEXT

Mountain Angel
25-03-2006, 16:35
It is the worst WD I have ever read. The batrep was total ******** too. This has me seriously considering getting out of the game.

Grimtuff
25-03-2006, 16:53
Grim, are your models in this issue then?

Sadly not, Lincoln should be in the next issue (It's only 1 model, but hey) Even though Ollie (store manager) was told his store would be in this issue.

Heru Talon
25-03-2006, 18:25
£4.00 for these mags...

£3.50 for WD 259 (example).

WD 259 (130) has two more pages than WD 316 (128)

20 pages of ads are worth 50p? (I don't ever recall any of the older mags having less pages because of supplements...).


Two pages to show the Piranha Box Set and the Piranha Team when they could of had both on one page if they hadn't messed about.


To much space just wasted, perhaps it's time to say goodbye to Owen?

Jonik
25-03-2006, 18:45
Hasnt Owen only just started? Give him a month or so before kicking him out...

Though I havent bought a WD in the last 4 months...

Charax
25-03-2006, 19:06
...Didn't Owen start 3-4 months ago?

my_name_is_tudor
25-03-2006, 19:09
you have to bear in mind the delay between an issue being made and the same issue being released, so yes, he has been in control for a good few months, but we have yet to really see what hes been up to over the rest of those few months.

t-tauri
25-03-2006, 19:25
I thought it was slightly better than the last issue, but the most interesting things were the previews of new stuff. I used to be able to read and then return to a copy of White Dwarf across the month until the next issue came out, re-reading stuff and looking at ideas. It's reached the point where it's unusual for me to look at a WD again outside the first day or two after receiving it.

Vespids live on floating rocks? Outside the Eye of Terror that's just a load of donkey-do.

Xeres
25-03-2006, 20:26
I bloody hope they make a effort for the next issue, white dwarf used to be bloody good awhile ago, now its just ads with some text thrown in.

FFS less ads and more GOOD content white dwarf team.

Issue Score: 1/10

emperorattack
26-03-2006, 02:40
i think this issue is the best one sice i dont know ALOT of issues back prob 30+

Trunks
26-03-2006, 06:13
I'm going off of the US WD here but . . .

Absolutely terrible. 1/10.

The only "content" worthwhile in this issue was the knowledge that you can take a Giant as Dogs of War (useful to have the rules there if you don't happen to own a Chaos or O&G book I suppose).

The layout/headings/art itself for the pages looked way different from any other issue I've ever bought, and not in a good way (I don't think that paper quality issues would be affecting something like this). The beginning section showing "what's coming out and how much it costs" was spread out across quite a few pages, but wasn't actually more things than usual (so, it was just filling up more space than it should for the hell of it).

The Ogre army showcased wasn't very impressive (paint job wise it wasn't special although it wasn't terrible, and the conversions weren't spectacular enough to make it a unique army like the Cathay one of the previous US issue which looked awesome).

The 40k section was pretty worthless. The Vespid article was a joke.

The Fantasy section was terrible, GIANT GIANT GIANT with little actual decent reading material, not any really interesting conversions and just big pictures of the sprue. The battlereport was okay to look at visually (I just look at the pictures in battlereports these days, I miss the old school battle reports like the 5th edition one between Beastmen and Undead when Necrons were first introduced to 40k). One model, no matter how large it is, is not enough to hold together an entire core system section.

Lord of the Rings had nothing of interest, and even though I don't play the game, looked really poor even by comparison to other LotR sections in other issues.

I give it one point just for the conversion article on the Maneater, which was decent (although not exceptional).

An absolute waste of money. I liked the previous issue, I'm hoping the next issue is better.

Rick_1138
26-03-2006, 08:46
flicked through the mag at a mates last night, nice pics of CoD stuff that i hadn't seen, GD winners booklet, okay the 6 pound one last year was a lot better (i did get it for free) but this one was very crap, even if they had charged £2.50 for it i would have bought it so they could have thickened it out with soem opinions etc and some Games day pics.

anyway, i got into the idea of warmachine a wee whiule back, now whilst no one plays it near me, i do buy No Quarter, this is an excellent magazine, with rules, stories, excelent step-by-step painting guides, of high quality finished models, not the "paint it simply for the children" ala WD.

anyway, this is how WD should be done, some say that No Quarter doesn't have to split up articles betweeen multiple game systems, but with the release of Hordes, kinds less warjacks (big mech things) more monsters etc. so it can be done.

So for ads for GW stuff i get white dwarf, for a good read i get No Quarter.

P.S. Horus Rising by Dan Abbnet, is very good, thoroughly enjoying it, i would recommend.

Wintermute
26-03-2006, 09:37
Can we keep this thread on topic which is discussing UK WD 316 and keep the comparsions to NQ to a minimum?

If anyone wants to compare and contrast NQ with WD, start a new thread.

Wintermute

Rick_1138
26-03-2006, 13:02
gauntlet picked up and slapped back! Wintermute (with all greatest respect of course!) :))

The White Dwarf Vs No Quarter, discuss.. thread can be found here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=562491#post562491)

Hlokk
26-03-2006, 13:34
£4.00 for these mags...

£3.50 for WD 259 (example).

WD 259 (130) has two more pages than WD 316 (128)

20 pages of ads are worth 50p? (I don't ever recall any of the older mags having less pages because of supplements...).
Thats called inflation mate. 259 was what, 6 years ago?

WD seems to be the only thing GW don't overcharge for.

Odin
27-03-2006, 11:01
I used to really look forward to battle reports. They were always the bit of WD I read first, and most enjoyed. But they really do seem quite lame recently, for a number of reasons:

1) Little or no background to the battle. This month's fight between Empire and Orcs & Gobbos with four Giants in it was just begging for some sort of background story. This hobby has been gradually becoming more of a competitive sport than a fun hobby, and it doesn't help when BatReps come across as just a game.

2) Where was the text? Most of the space was taken up with huge pictures of the battlefield. I'd much rather see an improved version of the old smaller diagrams, with more text to explain the reason for tactical moves, and to add more flavour to the BatRep.

3) My last point is a minor one in comparison to the other two, but why does the BatRep always say things like "Bob took the first turn, advancing his troops ....blah...blah...blah..." - I always have to refer back to find out which army Bob is using. Much more sensible to say "the Empire took the first turn, with Bob advancing his troops...".

This month's BatRep could have been great. It had an original idea, some amusing moments, and turned out to be extremely close. But the writing took a backseat to pretty pictures of the new models, and there was no focus to the report - rather than being an epic clash between two giant-assisted armies it was just a game of toy soldiers.

Overall on this month's White Dwarf I agree 100% with Avian's comments on Page 1 of this thread.

philbrad2
27-03-2006, 20:20
5/10

As ever 1st stop was the 40k section for me ...

Disappointing issue. A number of opportunities missed. Vespids article could have offered so much more, it was vague and dull.
Tau modelling articles. great if I was 12 and had just picked up a scalpel. Painting guide on the Pirahna/Hammerhead wasn't bad.
Taros articles were pretty good but who painted those Elysians? They were horrible! Desert fighting looked OK - suppose there is only so much you can write on fighting on pretty featureless terrain like desert :D For those who follow the web articles, the WD/web crossover if getting a bit 'samey', ok if they feature same or similar content but release them at least to coincide. Or preferably diversify the content a little. At least dont release things like the Tallarn painting guide when it appears on the web to coincide when WD is published.
Medusa V - nice little preview and appetite whetter, my personal highlight of the issue.

LoTR - I actually quite like the 'Eavy Metal article on LoTR character painting. Pitched at the sort of level I like to see. Although the remainder of the section was a yawnfest for me.

WHFB - C'mon the giant is a cool model but 10 pages on it? Other WHFB I've not read or at least had a good look at yet.

Dok Butcha- Not bad although I'd like to this section include a model from every system each month.

Building Battlefields - OK article bit simplistic though, all the modelling articles within WD seem very much fixed in the less experienced end of the modelling spectrum.

Standard Bearer - This had the making of a good article. I for one am quite interested in the new design & production technology GW is embracing. All we got was a few vague columns on new new production 'black arts' that were more vague than a vague thing. Had someone like Jes G with a good knowledge of the production processes had an input on this, even if not highly technical, could have made this a good, interesting article.

Astronomicon - Some ok pieces in there. Nice conversions. The bl00dy storefinder. Hopefully when the remainder of Europe get their editions this will slim down.

Another "Hey kids look at our new shiney models!!!' issue. I did say in Jan the FEB/MAR/APR UK issues would be a Tau fest, I wasn't wrong although they doo seem a bit more restrained than the BT articles at the end of last year and into this. WD is visually exciting to look at. Lots of cool pics but lacking on content and more particularly for me depth of content. This issue turned up with my 'you have 3 issues left of your subscription' letter - we'll see if GW gets my £36 annual subsription.

:chrome:

Hlokk
28-03-2006, 21:41
I found the following comment about 316 on the GW forums from Che Webster:

Hi guys!

I'm new here, so please forgive my naievity in asking this... but...

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING NICE TO SAY ABOUT WD316?

The reason I ask is that, after reading this lot and noticing (I think) only 2 nice things, I woudln't be surprised if Owen was left hiding under his desk wondering when the artillery barrage might lift.

Owen is a gentle, easy-going chap who, like all gentle animals, likes to be coaxed along with sugary treats rather than beaten with big billy-clubs.

Come on... we can do better... speaking to him at breakfast today I know Owen's read every word on here... aren't we supposed to be nice people in a fun hobby, enjoying our miniatures and games?

Do we have any helpful suggestions?

Anyone want to say anything encouraging and help me get Owen to come out from under his desk? ;)

Here's my one: I liked the Medusa V campaign poster...

and this is after about 130 replies of constructive feedback, including one from the mods.

While I have the upmost respect for Che, (he even suggests putting together a list of questions and e-mailing them to owen on behalf of the posters on there), I get the feeling that the WD changes arent the fault of owen or the WD team at all.

Wintermute pointed out a couple of months ago that Owen can't take out the store finder because its a decision from the men in suits. I suspect the bosses have a much tighter stranglehold on WD content than we currently realise, and that Owen is honestly doing the best he can in the situation

And apparently next month onwards, WD is going to be a "miniature showcase", it'll be fun reading the reviews for that

Satan
29-03-2006, 05:44
And apparently next month onwards, WD is going to be a "miniature showcase", it'll be fun reading the reviews for that

Not that I'm overly sarcastic or anything, but I wonder what'll happen when they find that people have stopped buying the mag. And I agree, I don't blame Owen or the WD team either, doing so would only be pointless and in conflict with constructive criticism.

Avian
29-03-2006, 13:06
I've moved the comments on WD in general to the other sticky thread. Please limit this one to this spesific issue.

-The Moderators

philbrad2
29-03-2006, 16:33
Well I'd call all the comments in this thread fall as 'constructive criticism' there's the WD general comments thread as AVIAN mentions, plenty of scope for Owen to read what we think. As HLOKK intimates, I to think the huge amount of GW self promotion in WD of its new product is something the editor doesn't have to much control over. GW Marketing, and what sells, have a big hold on what we see - the fact we have a spanky new Tau codex is testament to this methinks. How many gamers would have put the Tau at the top of their codex revamp wishlist???I think their influence extends to what goes into WD.

However if subscribers/readers keep getting a decrease in the amounts of 'hobby' content in the magazine, be it rules, background or modelling articles then I think people will stop purchasing it. As with other goings on within GW currently, I think there is the need to strike a balance between GW self promotion (afterall WD is a GW magazine, and why shouldn;t they use it to self promote) and supporting the 'hobby', which GW is telling us its doing, however to me on the evidence on issue 316 it's something to GW needs to show gamers both new and old.

:chrome:

Flame of Udun
29-03-2006, 19:50
I finally had a look through 316 at my local GW store today and despite some mild improvements on the black miasma that was 315, it was still mostly pap. I've given it a 5 this time as there are a couple of bits I want to have further look at but the thing that seems to stick in my mind are the 2 pages wasted on the pirahna! 2 bloody pages! One pic of the model and box plus perhaps a variant colour thumbnail would have been plenty. Also, why does it seem that GW is going uber photoshop, I mean fair enough plug the new giant model (personally I reckon it looks pants but that discussion is for elsewhere) but can't they afford some decent art work for the covers of WD anymore or have they sacked their art department?

Agamemnon2
30-03-2006, 06:31
The word is "downsized", I believe. Down to about zero, give or take two.

Osbad
30-03-2006, 06:57
but can't they afford some decent art work for the covers of WD anymore or have they sacked their art department?

Well, I posted elsewhere a month or so back that apparently they hhad done just that - I heard it from the Area Sales Rep who himself was worrying about whether he had a job to go back to when he next checked his email!

At the time I speculated that we would see more photo-shop stuff and less original artwork, as well as a lot of reuse of old art from codices and army books.

Of course they could still use contract artists, but I guess the proof of the pudding...

EvC
30-03-2006, 09:16
Not a good issue at all, 3/10 tops.

WH section - Having a token article that wasn't about Giants would have been nice. I like the size comparison, although the new Giant's head looks so tiny in comparison to the previous one's! I found it quite appalling that considering they touted the 4 Giants battle report, they had to use the Ogre Slave Giant model as the second Orc Giant. Could they not find another one somewhere?!

40K - some good stuff, Vespid article was a huge disappointment though.

LotR - was this a joke, or are we just preparing for the huge barrage of LotR stuff that's coming next month?

Finally, I'm sure Owen is a nice guy, but if he's going to sign off his editorial with "fellow hobbyists", how about he puts some content about the hobby in there rather than, "this month we have new Giants- buy them! And the Tau!" blather. It's not like anyone could buy the mag and NOT know there's a new Giant model out!

Xhalax
30-03-2006, 15:43
I don't usually read White Dwarf...but I read this months only because I bought for my brother but when to my parents house and so got to sit and read it before giving it to him.

And overall, I thought it was prety crappy. There was a couple of bits I enjoyed about it. But overall, I wasn't impressed. Especially snce a few days before I sat and read one of the older copies with the Index Xenos article about the Kroot in it.....which i thought was brilliant.

I'm not impressed.

Flame of Udun
30-03-2006, 17:14
The word is "downsized", I believe. Down to about zero, give or take two.

Well, I posted elsewhere a month or so back that apparently they had done just that

You're kidding right?! Gawd, just the thought of more photoshopped pap makes me feel like my eyes are gonna start bleeding! It has a certain irony to it though since they not long since brought out the Art of 40K, it's kind of "So long and thanks for all the artwork!". I guess the grim, grim darkness of the far future will be looking less grim and even more naff than previously expected.

thommo
30-03-2006, 19:02
Gave this issue 2/10...and i think i was being generous.

I'm not fussed by the paper quality as these things happen from time to time and there was an apology published before it was released....

...but the content was about as interesting and entertaining as my cat (who was recently neutered and now seems to spend all his time asleep!!).

I've spent 20 minutes flicking through and have left it on the lounge table with no intention of going back to it - i ended up feeling patronised, especially with that cruddy size comparrison thing where you saw how big the gian was....no *****...it's a giant!!! :eyebrows:

would rather have spent my £4 on something which i could torment my cat with....at least i can goad him into doing something entertaining!

boogle
30-03-2006, 23:09
Well i usually find something useful in every copy of WD (i have every copy since 140), but this one i managed to get through in 10 minutes (including the GD booklet), if it wasn't for the fact that the 'magazine' was shrink wrapped, i would have asked Xhalax to take it back and get her money back (or do an exchange), i'll get nexts month's only for the Medusa V booklet, and if it's a crappy as this months, i may not read another copy.

The Bat Reps are getting to the stage where A) i'm actually missing them as they aren't well defined within the 'magazine', B) there is no definition to the games, this months was exceptionally poor (actualy worse than the Easterling one a couple of months ago), no proper turn sequence, and only the Giants were fixated upon (why not just put the Giant Bash rules in this issue and have them slug it out instead of 4 giants with various supporting cast members).

LOTR is usually take a look at, but this month there was nothing to see.

I'm actually looking forward more to reading the 1st 5 issues of Wargames Journal than going back to my WD, and if it's really going to be a miniatures showcase with very little text then it says the following things to me:
1) They don't have the staffing levels to write decent articles
2) They are being forced into turning WD into a £4 a month catalogue (it can be argued it's aways been that way, but at least there has always been SOMETHING to pique my interest, sadly not this time
3) The don't give a toss about what the majority of CURRENT gamers want to see (i don't just mean Vets, but i dare say even those that are getting into the hobby want something with a little more substance to it, than what is now being produced)
4) Why even bother showcasing the Specialist Games stuff, the Mordheim stuff was middling to poor, but not as bad as the Necromunda stuff, i really feel they should leave the stuff to the website (and the Fanatic magazine is still churning out decent articles every time i read it)

ok, it's a long time since i had a rant like that, hopefully i've gotten everything off my chest

oh and what a bunch of gits!!, i'm going to have to not buy any Elysian Veterans AGAIN this month as i need to save up £100 for the Buildings Boxed set

Kodamas
31-03-2006, 18:27
Well well well...

Bought this issue on the way to work. The main thing I noticed was the Magazine had a very bad feel to it. Let me explain: It was thinner and the paper was very noticable in difference and the GD booklet was not upto the usual standards. Overall I felt like I had just bought a cheap weekly magazine rather than the monthly Catalogue I normally get.

After I get a full look through it all I will give a further review and score.

StugMeister
01-04-2006, 13:20
Yup, the paper is thinner. I noticed this the moment I opened it up. So they're charging us the same price for an inferior magazine - the quality of the paper means that the print isn't as vibrant and contrasting as normal.

I was very disappointed with this issue. Some of the articles are ok though.

lord_blackfang
01-04-2006, 13:51
Not that I'm overly sarcastic or anything, but I wonder what'll happen when they find that people have stopped buying the mag.

Raise the price :D

Nemesis Inferno
01-04-2006, 16:17
I didn't like it that much, each month I try to have a neutral opinion, especially after last month, and now I think putting Owen there was a bad idea, Haley did rather well actually imo, splitting it up, towards the end it got a bit flustered yes, but it worked somehow...
Reading some of my first issues from the latter part of Sawyer's era, it shows how degraded the mag has become, it has little/no content...

Tyrani
01-04-2006, 19:34
Its a pretty good issue, but its way too focussed on Giants, the Battle Report is a shambles (honestly who needs two Giants in a army?) as the 4 (yes 4!) giants stop the infantry from doing what they do best, the thing that has made it worth it is the amazing Index Xenos article on the Vespid and the showcase of the new 40K models (finally a Lucius model!) that will be released during the Medusa V campaign (Nurgle DP and the new Scouts look cool as does the new Chaplain), the LOTR section is as boring as always but informative, the Mordheim bit als has some good info in it.

underdog
01-04-2006, 20:05
, the thing that has made it worth it is the amazing Index Xenos article on the Vespid .:wtf:

I'm sorry to disagree but it has to be the worst index Xenos article ever,
it gave no real insight in to the vespids as a race or culture.
it gives no info on how thy came to be part of the tau empire or even first contact with the tau,
no use of language or how they communicate with each other,or the tau
no info on hierarchy within the vespid community
all the things that would make an article interesting and informative.

all in all a big steaming pile of poo!!

seriously if you thank this is amazing try getting hold of some older index Xenos articles like the kroot one,now that was good.;)

cheers

Andy

Ragnar
01-04-2006, 20:06
I didn't like it that much, each month I try to have a neutral opinion, especially after last month, and now I think putting Owen there was a bad idea, Haley did rather well actually imo, splitting it up, towards the end it got a bit flustered yes, but it worked somehow...
Reading some of my first issues from the latter part of Sawyer's era, it shows how degraded the mag has become, it has little/no content...

Completely agree with you there. White Dwarf may not have been at its best with Mr Haley as editor, but it was sure as hell better then the dribble we are currently getting with Mr Rees. Send him back to the webteam and get a good editor back in place.

The index xenos artilce gives very little insight into the Vespid backgound and the picks of the new Cityfight stuff have been around on the web for ages so nothing special there.

Kodamas
01-04-2006, 20:44
I had a little closer look and those that said the paper was not that noticeable I cannot see how you can say that! Some pages on my magazine were liek cheap cigarettes with lines running across them. Although this is fine for cheap cigarettes its not se great for a White Dwarf.

My 5p.

Will update my full pound once I read it all. Which going by the size of the writing will take me less time than reading a Mr. Men book!

Heru Talon
01-04-2006, 22:03
As has already been mentioned the WD paper issue was a problem with the paper people (GW did appologise for it on the UK site before the mag even came out).


So yes we all know the paper was crap already!

Jeese Louise and Owen Rees...

Venkh
01-04-2006, 22:24
Bought the mag today despite all the bad publicity.

Paper quality not a problem, save some money guys it really doesnt detract from the content.

Now the "content"

New releases - Good format, everything we need to see.
News - Well presented no problem.
Giants Be Amazed! - Nice presentation of the parts and reasonable descripitve text whats with the large font though? Are all WD readers now assumed to be visually impaired.
Giants Rules - Nothing we aint seen before, clarification of which armies can take em.
Battle Report - Horrible Horrible Horrible. Horrible format, horrible narrative, horrible enlessly used studo models. Again giant text to fill the empty space. I also really dont like the headers in the top corners. I dont want to ever see another slaugh o meter.
Counter measures - All pretty obvious stuff.

Standard Bearer - Good subject matter and very interesting. A bit more depth would have been nice, why does Jervis have to pretend he's some sort of eejit ?

Tau vehicle article - Quite interesting, nice step by step guide, like the stippling effect.

Vespids - Not enough depth, long ago there would have been some artwork and a nice fluff story to accompany this, Instead we get "watch out brothers, theyve got guns that ignore our 3+".

COD Article - Lots of nice piccies, some fluff but not enough actual written content.

Tallarins - Good to see an article on the guard, a scenario and SUNWORMS! Shame i dont play guard but Im sure it held Imps rapt.

A little reading - Dont really know what this was about, was it a modelling article or a plug for the BL?

Modelling workshop - Good beginner article.

Mordheim - Was that it? Could have been longer.

Astrowhatsit - Nice to see more shop models. Were the letters sent in txt format, they can hardly be called letters at all.

All in all i would say some nice pictures, i really like to see all of the bits of a model painted.

Please bring back the defined sections for each system and the mini editorials.

Could we have more words on each page please, all we seem to be getting are soundbites.

All in all i would give this a 5.

Paddy
02-04-2006, 13:28
Short review: Worst issue to date, and for me that 11 years worth of issues. I don't say that lightly.

Long review:

General Points:

+ Cover and paper issues: Non-existant, this is fine, well done GW, pennies saved.
- White space: Far too much of it, magazine feels half empty.
- Giant font. Try using content to take up space, not larger print gentlemen. This is a big problem, as its very transparent that the articles are much shorter than previously, and it doesn't matter how much of the page you take up with it, only more text will extend reading time.
- Section mini summaries: MIA. These were actually good, bring them back.
- Layout: No longer clear where one article ends and another begins, just runs through, and not in a good way. This applies to the sections too, 40K just jumps on you after a fantasy article.
- Shorter to cover the GD booklet. We noticed. Nice try.


Page by page:

* Contents and editorial: Fine, never expect much here, but then why would you.
- New releases: How much space do you want to take up? Dear god, I remember when it was 4 releases a page, 2 if something important or needing to sell well (like the multipart plastic SMs when they arrived). Poor show, spreading these out to cover less articles, and very annoyin when you want to get to articles to have to flick through so many pages of so fwe models.
- Giants intro: 2 pages wasted telliong us nothing that wasn't in the contents already.
- Giant types: Took double the space needed.
+ Giant parts: This is good, we like seeing the bits on the sprues, and painted for clarity like when the Dwarves came out is a nice move.
* Dogs of war giants: Wouldve given it a positive, as a useful article, but is it official or not? This needs to be very clear.
+ Sculpting the giant: Good. Expand please, some of this is interesting.
* Battle report: Themed around new release, fair enough. Table map good, army lists clear enough. Actual report - what report? Information, like why things were done etc. please. And drop the slaught-o-meter, most of your customers are over 8.
* Giant uses and counters: A bit basic, but new people might find it helpful I guess.
- Jervis & Standard bearer: We are interested in this new technology. But for all his greatness, Jervis didn't tell us nything useful about it though, so why not a collaboration article with a techy who uses the stuff? And there's already a plastic siege tower for warhammerJervis.
- Tau tanks. Again with the "how much spce does a small article require?" line. Masterclass is quite frankly a joke - advanced techniques for masterclasses please. Nice to see that interchagable weapons are being encouraged though.
- Index Xenos. One page of text, when it needed (and we expected) 4-5. Sketch page nice, but painted mini pics shouldve been on one page only. and flying rocks? Hey, its your universe, but please show some quality control as thats just rubbish. Background of these pages is much better though, old style with faint pictures.
* Cities of Death preview. Big advert, fair nough, but wasted chance to tease us with content of the book.
* Medusa V preview. Same again, fair call on the big advert, but chance to tease again missed. New models are a waste of space, and shouldve been with the releases at the start of the magazine. Unless this is the tease, in which case poor planing - we want to be encouraged to play the campaign. New minis at the front thank you very much.
- Tyranids: Singled out as an especially bad waste of space - 2 models on 2 pages. Bad.
+ Taros & desert war: Actually a good article, even though its on a "buy forgeworld" mission. Those variant roughrider mounts shouldve been here though - opportunity yet again missed.
+ Combat Patrol: Excellent, this is a good short article. Perhaps shouldve been followed by one on an entire army though.
* Desert terrain: Not bad, couldve been clearer on how to set up the terrain though. Roll once for the whole table? Per square foot? This is an entry level article and needs that extra clarity.
* Showcase: Fine, no complaints.
+ A little reading: More! This was crying out to be a longer rticle too.
* Black Library advert: Fine.
- Heroes of Rohan: I assume this was meant to be apainting article, but it didnt give us any pinting advice. Just 3 pages of pictures that tells us nothing, followeed by an advert. Waste of space.
- Legions of Middle Earth: 4 army lists, 4 pages, oh wow. What exactly is this bit for? some of us actually play the game and want articles.
- Another Medusa V advert: We go it already, keep the related conent together please.
* Dok Butcha: Piercings. Nice enough I guess. How about somehing for every system each month though? Or a specific sculpting msterclass?
+ Building battlefields: Newbie friendly. Good. Couldve done more though - inspire the beginners!
* Terrain adverts: fair call - thought GW made more stuff though, like trees etc - might as well make the most of the double page spread.
- Citadel toolbox: Shouldve been a half page somewhere.
* Bloodbowl tournament advert: Fair call.
- Mordheim. Er, you could actually tell us about the campaign you ran here, or more than 2 of the players, or even Battle Report the finale. scenario - good. Hired swords - eiiter showcase the gangs, or don't bother. Temple of Morr - how was it made? Potentially great article missed again.
- Astronomican: Great, a newletter dies for the pap that is WD online. GW Nottingham Central's rimson fists, and Gloucesters Orks would make good showcases, like that old store armyfeature that was sadly dropped a while back. Events and store list there as always. New bits, fair enough, if again taking up too much space with too few parts. Advance order - er, shouldn't this be somewhere it might actually get read? No mention of the Fall of the Necromancer in the main body of the magazine either, which is a mistake. Letters page - these are letters? How about showcasing a good readers army instead of a few tiny pics here? The rest is waste material. WD paint station - fair call, we are nosey about you guys, and better here than at the front for those who are indifferent.

Comment: Despite all those pluses, this is still an issue very much less than the sum of its parts.


If you play:

40K: Some people play on desert boards. Stingwings might make the background if we get time. Theres a campaign starting, but we don't think the point is rammed home enough. Very poor.

Fantasy: Some of you can use giants in games. Aren't giants great? Did we mention we like giants? There's a new giant out, if you didn't know. And nothing else. Dire.

LotR: There was nothing. Seriously. this is utterly unnacceptable for supporting a so-called "core" game system. If the liscence is a burden, make it specialist and stop pretending - hell, I'm one of the people who loves the game, even go as far as to say its the best of the three cores, and I don't want it to be relegated or dropped, but my God this is not good enough.

Brimstone
02-04-2006, 14:01
Well I've been buying WD since issue 96 and I haven't brought this or issue 315.

It will take some drastic changes to get me buying again.

What a sad slide downhill. :(

fsssh
02-04-2006, 14:26
I would like to write a long, possibly not very nice, critique of this months WD, but there is no point as just about everyone else beat me to it and I have nothing to add.

My first issue was 82 - I still have it, and occaisonally like to read a good artlicle about warhammer on ships, 'all the nice dwarves love a sailor', and making said ships too. I wonder how many of us will want to read about the plastic giant in 20 years time?

If you think there is any point comparing material value, issue 82 came out in Oct '86, cost 95p and had 64 pages plus the cover. Worth adding the editor was Paul Cockburn and on the letters page one reader writes in 'WD has become the slickest, most useful and interesting magazine of it's type.'

WD316 verdict 1/10, and only because there was no 0/10 option.

In conclusion, 'White Dwarf has become the slackest, most useless and uninteresting magazine of it's type.'

I give up

Luke
02-04-2006, 15:41
Its quite funny, the last 10 or so WD that i brought, i simply skimmed through then threw it on the "pile". I havent touched it since the postman shoved it through my letterbox.

From what i can remember it was quite limp. that was to say, apart from the usual weak content the whole mag seemed a bit....floppy. thin. Have they changed the paper or what? why am i paying 4 quid a month for a rag?
who knows.

As predicted they tried to force as much GIANT on us as possible, making sure that every with a fantasy army, no matter what race, knows they must buy one now to make their army teh-win uBerest!!

And i cant remember what else was in it. Some Tallarn *yawn* yep, I got those 10 years ago. We get it, they're desert warriors :rolleyes: but wait! you can paint them in ice world colours too! So no matter what gaming board you have, you still can field them! Wicked......

EDIT----------


the two guys who voted 10 must be easily pleased! God forbid I show them an issue from the mid 90's. their heads would probably explode. :D

Binabik15
02-04-2006, 17:27
Hm. I don´t know if I´m really allowed to do this, but I would like to say that I (for the first time in months, wait, years) enjoyed my WD.

The German WD 124 was good. Not great, good. I bought it for a trip to a museum our history course had to do and skimmed through it, reading the giant advertisements, erm, article. It was okay.

At home I took a closer look to the mag and looked for content, waiting to be dissapointed (I got every issue from 28 to 10X and 123, which wasn´t any good) and WAS BLOWN AWAY! :eek:

Shock! Horror! An entire article about naval combat for WHFB! With the announcement that 125 is going to feature monsters, steam ships and modelling tips!

And it was fun to read...

The rest of the articles were mostly the same as the UK edition i.e. pretty crappy, missing Astronomican, Butcha (but whe had a little conversion section last month), Mordheim and the booklet.


Well, I´m aware that many of you scream "But we know the naval combat part! It´s in the General´s Compendium! It´s teh oldskoolz!!1!!1" while reading this, but here in Germany I´ve never been able to get a copy of it.

And since the article is enriching the Warhammer history, the game system AND the modelling aspect I´m willing to buy the WD for it, because that´s what a good WD should do.

Excuse my spelling, but I´m ill and my head is feeling funny...in addition to that spell check doesn´t seem to work atm.

Wintermute
02-04-2006, 18:26
From what i can remember it was quite limp. that was to say, apart from the usual weak content the whole mag seemed a bit....floppy. thin. Have they changed the paper or what?

Allegedly a mistake made at the printers in Poland, and the wrong paper stock was used and yes WD 316 has less pages. How else do you think they covered the cost of the GD 2005 Booklet?

Wintermute

EvC
02-04-2006, 19:08
The "Free" booklet indeed, hahahahaha. How stupid do they think we are? Wait, don't answer that...

t-tauri
02-04-2006, 19:32
The "Free" booklet indeed, hahahahaha. How stupid do they think we are? Wait, don't answer that...
Hey, last year they sold it separately in the UK at, iirc, a fiver. I'd much rather have it this way.

Luke
02-04-2006, 19:59
yeah and i brought one :(

in hindsight, not my best purchase

EvC
02-04-2006, 21:33
Hey, last year they sold it separately in the UK at, iirc, a fiver. I'd much rather have it this way.

I am aware of this. However, that still doesn't make it "free" when they're cutting pages from the main publication.

Brandir
02-04-2006, 21:47
I am aware of this. However, that still doesn't make it "free" when they're cutting pages from the main publication.

Nothing is ever 'free' from a commercial organisation. We will end up paying for these 'free' items (and sales/special offers) eventually.

Paddy: superb review. You should print it out and send to GW via snailmail.

RevEv
02-04-2006, 21:54
If I start to show items/pictures to the wife then it's a good edition. In this case the articles all had some relevance to where I am as a gamer (including the three on the giants!) and it's great to see the Tallarn back in WD especially as I am about to add some TRF's to mine and change the same on the tanks.

Thankfully also less LOTR.

Paddy
02-04-2006, 22:53
Nothing is ever 'free' from a commercial organisation. We will end up paying for these 'free' items (and sales/special offers) eventually.

Paddy: superb review. You should print it out and send to GW via snailmail.

Thank you :) - and thats not such a crazy idea actually *wanders off to find ink for his printer*

EvC
03-04-2006, 00:30
Nothing is ever 'free' from a commercial organisation. We will end up paying for these 'free' items (and sales/special offers) eventually.


This is becoming a bit of a trend with my posts in this thread, but I am aware of this, thank you Captain Obvious :)

It's not free, we all agree. They're saying it's free. I'm laughing at them for saying it's free, when they cut loads of pages out of the issue so they can afford to include it. I equally laugh at video game magazines that include "free" cheat booklets and mobile phone ads that consider "free" to mean £30 a month. At least with sales and special offers in shops you ARE getting something free (or cheaper) in the short term, and a shrewd customer can gain the benefits. But this kind of "free" is laughable, and deserves to be laughed at.

Inquis. Jaeger
03-04-2006, 09:27
WD has given plenty of free things away in the past - even so far as entire mini-games, like the Orc Bar Brawl or the Dark Eldar Gladiator game. This ranges from card terrain, to datafaxes, reference cards AND GOLDEN DAEMON BOOKLETS!!!!

Never before have the cut a good 20 pages from the mag to make up for these.

Bob Hunk
03-04-2006, 10:09
I voted 5/10 as it was better than last issue. Everyone else has summed-up the bad points, so I won't repeat, other than to say:
* Bitterly disappointed by Vespid article, should have been 4-5 pages!
* Desert terrain rules weren't a total loss, might get some use...
I'll buy WD 317 for the campaign booklet, but than that's it for me, unless CA returns, although I won't hold me breath :(

Edit: Edited to reduce optimism that CA might return in the future.

EvC
03-04-2006, 13:44
Never before have the cut a good 20 pages from the mag to make up for these.

Yay, someone who gets my point! :D

stahly
03-04-2006, 13:54
Sometimes it seems that you people whine about things that we in Germany can ever dream of. Our WD has only 128 pages at maximum and even though the counterpart to your Astronomicon comprises less pages we have less space.
So no Tallarns, no Mordheim this issue but sometimes additional articles from the german team (e.g. two pages for how you can turn clan warriors into longbeards with face plates and coloring, great). Thus even more release of the month than the UK WD.
And the german layout team sucks. They can't even manage to keep the lines from two columns next to each other on the same height. Even in army books and codices.

Satan
03-04-2006, 13:57
And the german layout team sucks. They can't even manage to keep the lines from two columns next to each other on the same height. Even in army books and codices.

That's bad. That's really bad. If you've ever worked in Illustrator or, preferably, Indesign - you know how bad it is.

Inquis. Jaeger
03-04-2006, 14:18
Yay, someone who gets my point! :D

Essentially, it's not free if it costs us mag space elsewhere, and it's rude to call it free where, on previous occasions, 'free' has meant 'in addition to the rest of the mag'. I agree with you completely.

As an aside, anyone remember about a year or so ago, when we had a few issues that were 'bumper' sized. I don't have my collection to hand, but I'd wager that this month's issue was roughly half the size of the 300 issue or the 30 years issue

stahly
03-04-2006, 14:40
That's bad. That's really bad. If you've ever worked in Illustrator or, preferably, Indesign - you know how bad it is.

Think they're still using Quark, I don't know how it is there, but as you said in InDesign it's just some clicks for auto-align.

Grey Man
03-04-2006, 14:55
Agree with most of what's been said. Will add that if this is the way WD is going, I'm done buying it. Complete waste of my money.

Hlokk
03-04-2006, 16:34
On the subject of free gifts, anyone else think it was bad when, 6 months before WD went up in price, we got 6 months of free gifts to justify the price increase, then the free gifts just stopped.

Absolutely shocking that they think people can't see through that.

Edit: What free gifts would people like to see? Card Terrain? Floor Plans? Summary sheets for new armies?

Satan
03-04-2006, 17:07
Think they're still using Quark, I don't know how it is there, but as you said in InDesign it's just some clicks for auto-align.

Most Newspapers use some form of Quark, usually Quark Express. God knows why, it works for the newspaper format, but not for WD which IMO relies heavily on a proper design interface. I think part of why most people use Quark is because you can process printing data directly instead of having to keep part of it in your head, like you sometimes have to do with Indesign. And usually the larger (and older - as in, underdeveloped) printing firms, at least as far as I know, still use quark.

Wintermute
03-04-2006, 17:47
Most Newspapers use some form of Quark, usually Quark Express. God knows why, it works for the newspaper format, but not for WD which IMO relies heavily on a proper design interface. I think part of why most people use Quark is because you can process printing data directly instead of having to keep part of it in your head, like you sometimes have to do with Indesign. And usually the larger (and older - as in, underdeveloped) printing firms, at least as far as I know, still use quark.

The industry standard for DTP software is still QuarkXpress. It can and is used successfully for both newspaper and magazine design. There is no reason for QuarkXpress not be to used to design WD. The QuarkXpress pages would then be converted to PDFs using Adobe Acrobat Distiller and the resultant files transmitted to the printers in Poland.

There has been a lack of attention to detail on the lay out and design of WD for many years. It suggests the staff producing the pages have little or no previous experience of working in magazine or newspaper design.

Satan
03-04-2006, 19:46
I am however, only familiar with the swedish publishers. The local publishers I've known or worked with used indesign and illustrator mainly for books however, and as such I personally would prefer to use them in order to create a magazine which relies heavily on graphic images. But that's just my preference.

Goblit Skullhelm
03-04-2006, 22:48
Most of the main points have been covered, but I just thought I'd add one more thing about the content (or lack thereof). If you look down the spine of the magazine there's the summary of what's in the issue. There's a big space, because they had nothing left to put there. It just says Giant, Deserts, Heroes of Rohan and Mordheim. That's pretty much all that was in the issue.

Jedi152
04-04-2006, 07:32
I didn't mind this issue, apart for Jervis' rant.

"the new giant is the best thing we've ever made. No really! It sets the benchmark for new minis. It is the best. Best we've ever made. Did i mention the new giant is the best? and all new mini's will be compared to it's excellence!"

Didn't like the GD booklet. Don't get me wrong, it's great they did it free and didn't charge £6 or whatever, but i don't like GD winners whose minis aren't recognisable as GW. Like the 40k single mini winner (http://demonwinner.free.fr/uk/2005/golden_demon_winner.php?categorie=1). It could have been entered for a Confrontaion mini or anything. It looks like they made it for another system, and just entered it offhand.

Oh, and Martin Footit should be in charge of the new HE line!

Dr Death
04-04-2006, 10:28
This months WD really was quite stunningly abysmal. I mean really truly abysmal. It didnt seem like they were trying to smack in as many pictures as normal but the whole thing was an utter dissapointment. New releases was 14 full pages of pictures and prices, not a snippet of imformation, just "show em whats new".

The giant articles basically stated and restated the bleeding obvious with the battle report verging on the obnoxious with its "Slaught-o-meter" (which coincidentally just happed to be perfectly equal in the last couple of turns) and talking of turns, they dont even tell you when those are any more, condensing it down into a few overblown pages of text with "tactical insights" (or stating the bleeding obvious....again, as its more commonly known) from the generals.

Standard bearer wasnt just bad, it was a liability. "Im not going to go on about how great the kit is or how a warhammer army that can include one simply wont be complete enless it has one" :wtf:. And was over all just representative of the general thinly, and even thats pushing it, disguised message of "LOOK, SHINEY, BUY BUY BUY"

Index Xenos Vespid? A page a picture and shots of miniatures? 6 months ago we had a rather lovely article on the dark eldar and this is all "our savior" Owen Rees has to offer us?

The article on the fall of medusa V and cityfight was basically a rehash of what we had been told in the news section of the mag and was just pretending to be content. While the Taros article looked almost double spaced, so desparate was it to come across as having any substance while it still stunk of just trying to flog miniatures (this time models 10 years old)

The Blood on the Reik miniature creation article pretended to be a good read, but the conversions had so little of the look of the pictures it really wasnt worth it.

The Lord of the Rings section was even worse- "we cant be arsed to give you a step by step so heres a few rough guides and you do it". While a glaring error in the "themed" armies article had Cirion, dead for several hundred years at the time of the war of the ring, aiding faramir and the rangers of Ithillien.

Building battlefeilds wasnt much better, yet again falling under the "stating the bleeding obvious" catagory with condensed summeries of any imformation. And as for the Mordheim articles, well thats never been up to much has it?

Apologies for the rant but this issue really does deserve it, its terrible on so so many levels and reeks of a workshy White Dwarf team. I never thought i'd say this but Bring back Guy Haley.

Dr Death

slaughteredbull
04-04-2006, 10:39
This is by far the absolute worst WD I have ever had the misfortune to purchase, I knew each issue was getting worse but this issue takes the biscuit. From now on I think I'll just read my local library's copy and as I'm in charge of their club take it home when they pass it up to the club.

Odin
04-04-2006, 11:11
Didn't like the GD booklet. Don't get me wrong, it's great they did it free and didn't charge £6 or whatever, but i don't like GD winners whose minis aren't recognisable as GW. Like the 40k single mini winner (http://demonwinner.free.fr/uk/2005/golden_demon_winner.php?categorie=1). It could have been entered for a Confrontaion mini or anything. It looks like they made it for another system, and just entered it offhand.

Oh, and Martin Footit should be in charge of the new HE line!

I thought that model was superb. Yes it's pretty much scratch-built by the look of it, but I don't think it looks un-GW. It just looks like the best model GW have never made.

I take it Martin Footit was the guy who did the large-scale High Elf Spearman, in which case I couldn't agree more. He managed to make him definitely a High Elf, but without making him look like a crap transvestite. Of course, the larger scale helps, but that's what GW need to be aiming for I think.

f2k
04-04-2006, 11:36
Didn't like the GD booklet. Don't get me wrong, it's great they did it free and didn't charge £6 or whatever, but i don't like GD winners whose minis aren't recognisable as GW. Like the 40k single mini winner (http://demonwinner.free.fr/uk/2005/golden_demon_winner.php?categorie=1). It could have been entered for a Confrontaion mini or anything. It looks like they made it for another system, and just entered it offhand.


Unfortunately, it’s been a long time since GD was merely a painting competition. These days it’s more like 70% sculpting and 30% painting…

Jedi152
04-04-2006, 11:45
True. The winners of the open competition nearly always sculpt their own stuff, making that catogory only really open to GW and GW-level sculptors.

@Odin: Yes Martin Footit did the large scale elf. Exactly what high elves should look like, armour and all. I'm sure they could easily do that look in 28mm.

Maybe the 'big mutant' is just me, but it looks like it was made for another system, and just given the title 'big mutant' because it doesn't look like anything else 40k.

On second thoughts 316 is a real let down. i hate the WFB batrep crazy wonky power text and the "slaught-o-meter!" which is just dire.

Inquis. Jaeger
04-04-2006, 11:46
One major issue I had with 316 was the reduction in page numbers. It felt thin and floppy, with no real weight to it. Admittedly, this might be a by-product of the printing error reported before its release, but another larger reason could be the bundled GD booklet.

Firstly,

a) We used to receive this for free, in addition to a full-size Dwarf, with no discernable reduction in quality or size of the mag that month. What has changed? Last year they sold it. Surprise surprise, I didn't buy it. Fine, if you're going to bundle it, thank you very much, but given the choice over an extra 20 pages of content I might find useful, rather than LOTS AND LOTS of white space broken up by pictures of very nice models that are far too small to see the detail properly, I know which one I'd rather have.

b) Secondly, since you're pushing the whole 'combined arms' WD/Website thing, why not for the love of God just publish them online? No extra costs, just a small set-up time by one of your techies. If we are essentially looking at shiny pictures, why not do it online? And if you are so committed to an online presence, please please don't raise the pathetic and weak excuse that not everyone has internet access. Pretty much everyone does, either at home, work, school, Uni or an internet centre.

Poor poor performance all round

EDIT: Just browsing the GW website, and it looks like WD now only has 4 guys to cover both the Mag and the GW Website. This seems odd considering that a couple of years ago WD had at least 6 guys and the website has 3. That's over half the manpower lost. Maybe this is main reason WD has been so poor of late - a lack of man hours to produce the mag because of staff cuts from 'on high'

2ND EDIT: Also came across this under the 'WD Submissions Guide' -

"When writing an article, think of White Dwarf's audience. We want tightly focussed articles about specific points that will interest gamers who have been playing a while. We don't want articles aimed at beginners, nor for that matter ones that point out the obvious."

Could have fooled me

Jellicoe
04-04-2006, 11:59
Well. 100 responses to the survey and that tells its own story. Fully 64% thought that as an issue it stank, to varying degrees. Another 13% have sat on the fence with a resounding 'meh'

Less than a quarter have actually thought that it was a positive issue.

I would dearly love to hear from the two who rated it a 10 why they believed that to be a valid score

So there you have it White Dwarf team. Barely 1 in 5 of your readers when polled thought that what you provided was up to scratch.

Is this a representative sample?, well that is always debatable but given the approach taken by the GW forum mods in response to the feedback there that would suggest that the Warseer poll is not far off the mark

Brandir
04-04-2006, 19:04
I have just received the email notification for Black Gobbo 62 and White Dwarf Online 4.

The WDO articles are pretty poor. They are far from providing the detail to flesh out the limited WD 316 articles.

Black Gobbo is a good little magazine - stuff that WD should have in it.

Sniper Kelly
04-04-2006, 23:40
I'd say the issue is OK, but not great. 6/10

I enjoyed the giant articles even though I'm not a Warhammer player. I liked the bit on Vespids, too, though it is way too short. LOTR coverage is worse than abysmal this month, hopefully things will pick up next month.

Heru Talon
05-04-2006, 01:55
Didn't like the GD booklet. Don't get me wrong, it's great they did it free and didn't charge £6 or whatever, but i don't like GD winners whose minis aren't recognisable as GW. Like the 40k single mini winner (http://demonwinner.free.fr/uk/2005/golden_demon_winner.php?categorie=1). It could have been entered for a Confrontaion mini or anything. It looks like they made it for another system, and just entered it offhand.

&


Maybe the 'big mutant' is just me, but it looks like it was made for another system, and just given the title 'big mutant' because it doesn't look like anything else 40k.


That model is based upon the artwork of Quovandius from the Inquisitor rulebook (GW Specialist Games). So is entirely recognizable as a conversion for a GW game/40k, as long as you've seen said artwork beforehand.

C. Langana
05-04-2006, 03:19
Maybe the 'big mutant' is just me, but it looks like it was made for another system, and just given the title 'big mutant' because it doesn't look like anything else 40k.
Quovandius, an Inquisitor scale mutant looks an awful lot like that miniature there. Just yknow FYI.

EDIT: Alright, I should read to the end of the thread before posting.

There was also very little actual content in the magazine, I got to about page eighty or so, put it down, had dinner thinking that I'd still have plenty to read later, how wrong was I?

Jedi152
05-04-2006, 07:28
That model is based upon the artwork of Quovandius from the Inquisitor rulebook (GW Specialist Games). So is entirely recognizable as a conversion for a GW game/40k, as long as you've seen said artwork beforehand.

Quovandius, an Inquisitor scale mutant looks an awful lot like that miniature there. Just yknow FYI.
Ah. That i didn't know. Comment retracted.

Chuffy
05-04-2006, 07:48
"When writing an article, think of White Dwarf's audience. We want tightly focussed articles about specific points that will interest gamers who have been playing a while. We don't want articles aimed at beginners, nor for that matter ones that point out the obvious."

WHAT!?

Are you being serious sir?

"Point out the obvious"...what, like the Tau designer notes or every single tactica thats ever appeared in WD?:rolleyes:

Charax
05-04-2006, 08:23
one thing that I noticed in a side-by-side comparison of 316 and an old WD (241) which I was planning to post before it degenerated into a "What the hell were GW thinking?" rant was that the font size has gone up a point or two, which leads me to two conclusions:

1) GW believe most of WD's readers couldn't read text at the previous size and/or have the attention span of a goldfish with ADHD.
2) White Dwarf is written by twelve year-olds, whose response to being given a number pages to fill is less "wow, twelve pages? better get thinking" and more "Big pictures and large text will fill up much space!" - I was pulling that kind of rubbish in year 6, it is certainly not expected of what one assumes to be a team of professionals.

Another bugbear for me is "Standard Bearer" - lauded as the return of the much-missed J-files, it turns out to be Jervis waffling on about things we've been told about time and again, and about which he admits "is far beyond anything an old Luddite like me can understand" - sorry, but if you're getting paid for that article, one would assume you'd WRITE ABOUT SOMETHING YOU UNDERSTAND. without some technical information the entire article is reduced to "Ooh look, shiny, it make new models, you buy them now. it good" - hardly deserving of two pages, and a pitiful excuse for Jervis being absent from the Specialist Games scene.

316 is pathetic, especially in comparison with what has come before. what makes it even more fustrating is that we know GW can do better, they've done better for years. A shame, as I was about to restart my subscription, but at this rate I'll stop buying at 320, fill the gaps in my collection and eBay the lot.

Satan
05-04-2006, 08:32
Another bugbear for me is "Standard Bearer" - lauded as the return of the much-missed J-files, it turns out to be Jervis waffling on about things we've been told about time and again, and about which he admits "is far beyond anything an old Luddite like me can understand" - sorry, but if you're getting paid for that article, one would assume you'd WRITE ABOUT SOMETHING YOU UNDERSTAND. without some technical information the entire article is reduced to "Ooh look, shiny, it make new models, you buy them now. it good" - hardly deserving of two pages, and a pitiful excuse for Jervis being absent from the Specialist Games scene.


Things we've been told time and time again? From where? In defence of WD this must certainly be news to the people whose only source of GW-related information is White Dwarf.
And the other point is irrelevant, since he does come across with the fact that they've developed a new method of creating and designing sculpts. He just doesn't go into technical detail, because that would be, irrelevant, to the point he's making.

Charax
05-04-2006, 08:39
and what point is he making, exactly? Beyond, of course "We're making models in a new way, they're really cool, buy them"

Satan
05-04-2006, 08:46
The gist of it is that with the new way of creating models they'll be able to create sculpts with a higher standard (Which they need). And partly this is a reflection over the fact that they've gone beyond their traditional way of creating models. He is communicating a coherent development to us through this series of articles, and in a very good way, if you ask me.

I agree with the general consensus(sp?) here that WD needs to improve however.

And apparently trouts have a shorter attention span than goldfish. :P

Chuffy
05-04-2006, 09:32
The gist of it is that with the new way of creating models they'll be able to create sculpts with a higher standard (Which they need). And partly this is a reflection over the fact that they've gone beyond their traditional way of creating models. He is communicating a coherent development to us through this series of articles, and in a very good way, if you ask me.

They've already mentioned this in WD, when Tyranids were released. It's old news even for people whose only source of GW info comes from WD.

Satan
05-04-2006, 09:41
See, that's not really a point. There's a difference between old news, and news so old they've been lost in the infinite space of passing time.

Obviously WD felt the need to point this turnaround in manafacture out with a feature, and they did. To celebrate the fact that from now on, even though the technology has been available for good knows how long, practically every model will be made using partly computer-based assistance.
As far as I understand.

We ought to only allow constructive criticism in these threads...

Chuffy
05-04-2006, 09:58
See, that's not really a point. There's a difference between old news, and news so old they've been lost in the infinite space of passing time.

Obviously WD felt the need to point this turnaround in manafacture out with a feature, and they did. To celebrate the fact that from now on, even though the technology has been available for good knows how long, practically every model will be made using partly computer-based assistance.
As far as I understand.

We ought to only allow constructive criticism in these threads...

Codex Tyranids is old news? They havent even been out a year...

And as I said before, they've already mentioned this with the Tyranids and the Carnifex. They even said they'll be using digitalamisation to help create/design plastic moulds. Plus as I remember that article was written by someone who knew something about the process, not JJ who confesses he knows nothing about it.

Flame of Udun
05-04-2006, 10:10
IIRC this new and shiny tech has been definitely mentioned in WD before, they've just never gone into any real details about how it works., which they didn't even manage to do this time because I'm more than certain that JJ's seemingly pointless rabling about him not fully understanding this new tech was because he had his hands tied by somebody higher up and couldn't say any more. It was just a waste of 2 pages as far as I'm concerned since at no point did you get any really solid info into how the whole process works, etc.

Satan
05-04-2006, 10:33
Basic rules of arguing on the internet.

If GW feels the need to adress the issue with an article in WD then who are we, as expert opinionists, to criticise them in this case? I'd say our point were valid when it camed to inferior quality content of other articles, but in this case, where the feature is essentially a 2-page reminder of "SHINY NEW TECHNOLOGY" saying that "it's stupid" is about as constructive as... well, you get the idea.
Now, saying that this information, due to having been mentioned in WD some months ago, is an unnecessary feature in WD316 is much akin to saying that just because someone already said it, somewhere, sometime, makes it a waste of air to repeat it. All new hobbyists or those who have just recently picked up on WD aren't going to know it. Neither can we with any greater extensive knowledge say that this technology was perfectly implemented or fully utilized with the Carnifex and that therefore repeating the fact that "We did it again!" is an entirely useless waste of space. Perhaps they've upgraded it or used it to a greater extent when sculpting some of the new CoD miniatures. I doubt too many people outside the studio can say anything with certainty on this matter.

To summarize: Saying that this is stupid, without presenting any form of constructive criticism is just a waste of breath. Just because you've evolved enough to grasp the concept of having an opinion, doesn't mean it's necessarily a correct one, in any number of senses. No offense intended. I'm not calling anyone names here. I just think that if you find something at fault, then please present some form of constructive criticism. I can think of lots that they could've done better with this article - They could have made a technical explanation, they could've gone through it step-by-step with pcitures and diagrams to explain the process in its entirety. That's presenting possible improvement without simply claiming that they did something wrong.

And that's the end of this argument for my sake since I, in accordance with the basic rules for internet debating, won't be answering further posts regarding this specific issue.

Steel_Legion
05-04-2006, 10:36
got mine yesterday (was shocked to find they sell it at the train station, so couldnt resist) wish i had, it was rubbish, i dont like the way the magazines going, its not just trying to appeal to a younger gen, and my god how many pages did they waste on that giant?

Steel_Legion
06-04-2006, 08:44
i just read it.. its terrible, the battlereport was dumbed down, the giant took up about 10pages, and in general it wasnt good at all

Pilgrim
06-04-2006, 11:43
in general it wasnt good at all

Aha ha ha ha haa, lovely diplomatic skills there :)

It is the same thing as with issue 315. I flipped through that one on no less than 5 occasions trying to find a reason to buy it. For the first time ever with a WD I found there was absolutely nothing worth reading. The whole magazine was things I'd seen before, or in most cases just masses and masses of pictures. Same with 316. If these are the only articles we get (ie: ones with no content whatsoever) then I'm never going to be buying another WD, there just isn't any point paying 4 pounds for photographs.

Adrian

cailus
06-04-2006, 23:35
The Australian issue was totally and utterly craptacular. We didn't even get the article on Tallarns and because GW doesn't support Mordheim down here, there is no Mordheim section.

The only enjoyable thing about the Australian one was a Deathwing army article. The rest was just glorified advertising.

The battle report was total rubbish. I've already outlined it in another thread. The quality of the battle reports has decreased significantly ober the last few issues.

Plaguebeast
08-04-2006, 02:41
The last two posts sum up my opinion perfectly. I too have sifted through the magazine a number of times, but alas there isn't a single article that makes buying it worthwhile (and it has been the same with the last few WDs - indeed, in Aus it's been that way since the release of the BTs). The Deathwing article is good, but being a predominantly WFB player, it isn't enough to justify purchasing the mag.

Plaguebeast

Crube
08-04-2006, 11:13
Having gone back to 316 last night for a quick read, I found there was actually absolutley nothing there. Normally, WD wil last me a day on the bus to and from work (about 2 hrs). This one didnt even make it to the bus...

I made the decision, and have cancelled my subcription this morning. From now on, I'll read the local store copy and buy it if there's nything interesting..

Sad, but for the 1st time since issue 110, I may miss an issue...

god octo
09-04-2006, 10:03
i thought it was better then the previous issue, but not amazing. the tallerns section was quite good, but again, not amazing. The giant's battle report was confusing to read, with turns 1+2 joined and it was all higgldepiggledy (i like that phrase!)

overall, noit a brilliant issue, but mybe getting better?

Some guy (UK)
09-04-2006, 11:15
Just to comment on the poll- what jokers gunna own up for voting the "10" option;)

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Master Jeridian
09-04-2006, 12:09
I'll just comment on a specific section (since everyone has blasted WD already).

In the Standard Bearer section, am I the only one that finds the picture of the SM Captain to be highly detailed using the old-school methods.
And the picture of the Eldar Starcannon to be cartoony and simple under the new methods.

To me the new computer method may speed up design of models and progression to moulds- but it certainly doesn't improve detail.

But isn't that the new GW motto- quantity is now better than quality.

Phunting
09-04-2006, 13:38
Just to comment on the poll- what jokers gunna own up for voting the "10" option;) Well it was a public poll. So they're obviously not that ashamed!

Well pretty much everything has been said before. I too have every issue since the 180s, and of recent am seriously considering stopping. Though I must say this issue I felt was quite a bit better than the last two. That's not saying much though.

We shall see how it goes...

The Judge
09-04-2006, 16:19
I bought it more to have the complete set since issue 157 rather than because any of it was good to read.

I liked that they actually advertised some Forgeworld stuff though. Not worth £4, mind.

Sephiroth
09-04-2006, 16:35
I won't talk about the overall poor quality of the issue; others have. What I will mention is what the highlight of a WD is normally for me, the Index Xenos articles.

This one was not only short, it was poor. Do we get told what their character is? How about what their society and culture are like? Technology before and after contact with the Tau? What they eat? History of their nations? Do we get any of this? No. No we most certainly don't.

I'll summarise what we're told about them:

They come from Vespid. They fly. They sting. Hence, Imperials call 'em Stingwings. They got guns that ignore Power armour. Go buy them kids!

Wonderful. :eyebrows: :rolleyes:

Wintermute
09-04-2006, 16:43
I won't talk about the overall poor quality of the issue; others have. What I will mention is what the highlight of a WD is normally for me, the Index Xenos articles.

This one was not only short, it was poor. Do we get told what their character is? How about what their society and culture are like? Technology before and after contact with the Tau? What they eat? History of their nations? Do we get any of this? No. No we most certainly don't.

I'll summarise what we're told about them:

They come from Vespid. They fly. They sting. Hence, Imperials call 'em Stingwings. They got guns that ignore Power armour. Go buy them kids!

Wonderful. :eyebrows: :rolleyes:

Its short because IIRC its the same text and images which appeared in the Xenology book.

Inquis. Jaeger
09-04-2006, 18:09
Its short because IIRC its the same text and images which appeared in the Xenology book.

Actually, I think it's lifted directly from the Codex: Tau Empire book. The Xenology book doesn't feature Vespids

Crube
09-04-2006, 18:47
Just to comment on the poll- what jokers gunna own up for voting the "10" option;)

Later, Some Guy (UK)
according to the poll, it was...

'emperorattack' and 'Psyren'

what done it...

The Judge
09-04-2006, 18:48
Fiends.

Vespid isn't even copied and pasted from the Empire codex - huge chunks have been lost in the copying.

juddski
09-04-2006, 19:35
i was dissapionted with this issue *WD 316*,i just hope it's not a continual downward trend or i'll have to re-consider my options about buying this every month:cries:

EvC
09-04-2006, 20:12
Next month is the last chance for me. Given that I don't think that they're going to include a WH(40K) battle report, it will most likely be the last time I waste my money on it. Shame...

Sephiroth
09-04-2006, 21:16
Its short because IIRC its the same text and images which appeared in the Xenology book.

There's nothing about the Vespid in Xenology. I bought the WD to find out more on these guys, combined the information (trimming bits that are repeated from the 'dex) there is barely a page in total.

I mean if you remove the art on the Vespid page in the 'dex, and add the WD Index Xenos new bits, you might, just might get a full page.

Very poor GW. :eyebrows:

Charax
09-04-2006, 21:31
All those pages of colour schemes are still part of the IX article, you know...

not a *good* part, but still...

Sephiroth
09-04-2006, 21:57
All those pages of colour schemes are still part of the IX article, you know...

not a *good* part, but still...

And they tell me what exactly about the Vespid? Besides the fact they come in different colours and use armour in the same colour as the Tau force they accompany?

Because it's not like the Codex: Tau Empire did that... oh wait, it did. :rolleyes:

Charax
09-04-2006, 22:15
Like I said, not a good part of the IX article, but we don't get to decide what constitutes that article. GW do, and by the great big Index Xenos sidebar, I would assume they decided that's part of it.

Sephiroth
09-04-2006, 22:26
Like I said, not a good part of the IX article, but we don't get to decide what constitutes that article. GW do, and by the great big Index Xenos sidebar, I would assume they decided that's part of it.

Maybe, but I do get to decide whether or not I think it was a good or bad article. I'd rate it a 2 on a scale of 10 - merely because it actually had information on them.

And you'll notice I said earlier we'd have barely a page if we removed the art. I don't care for two pages worth of pretty pictures to teach me about Vespid - what, is this a background document, or a painting guide? :rolleyes:

Charax
09-04-2006, 22:41
It's a painting guide, they're just trying (not very hard) to hide it.

Mr_middle_way
10-04-2006, 00:01
I'm fed up with the utter crap that is white dwarf. I get dozens of free magazines through my letter box everyday, i don't expect to have to go out and pay £4 for another one.

Being a Tau player who likes the dynamics of the Vespid in game i was looking forward to the IX article because without any fluff behind them, they are just insect jump infantry who kill marines good. I like to talk to my opponent about a race, add some idle chat and humour...thanks to white dwarf, i can tell my opponent to "buy them now!" and thats about it.

There is no next issue redemption for me, this is the last issue for me....good riddence too.

Some guy (UK)
10-04-2006, 10:51
Oh by the way, if you are wondering why I voted '5' on the poll, it's because I haven't bought the mag, only flicked through it in a few seconds, so I didn't want to affect the score:)

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Reabe
10-04-2006, 13:13
I brought this issue for the DOW Giant rules, but was plesantly surprised to see an article to make a nice Lore of Death Wizard, which I'm going to make and use as a DOW Wizard. Everything else in this issue sucked, though.

So I'll give it a three.

Edit: Whoever is making the pictures, can someone please take the photoshop program from them? I mean, I want to see the miniatures, not the fact that GW has hired someone who knows how to put a sun-flare in a picture, damnit.

The Judge
10-04-2006, 17:02
The Photoshop bulls$%*&... who ever came up with that...and why do they keep it? I have heard nobody say they like it.

Even the Empire article didn't show us how to make the models, so all in all it was just an advertisement for the Blood on the Reik. (Which is a good book)

Heru Talon
10-04-2006, 23:29
The cover "art" is the exact same image that was used for the Warhammer Giant Sneak Peek picture on the GW site news page...

Phunting
10-04-2006, 23:49
The Photoshop bulls$%*&... who ever came up with that...and why do they keep it? I have heard nobody say they like it.But it looks like the models are actually fighting!!!!!! Kewl or wot?

Brushmonkey
11-04-2006, 08:07
I like the Photoshop work. Doesn't need to be quite as prevelant as it is, but nice never the less.

Osbad
11-04-2006, 08:27
It's ok but its overused. Like everything else it gets a bit boring.

Plus it is cheating really. It is like those blemish-free pinup girls in magazines. No-one really looks like that in real life. What is the point of publishing "trick photographs" of miniatures in a hobby magazine if you can never aspire to reproducing them?

I mean with the women you can fantasize, but with the miniatures - ultimately you are left with an unsatisfied feeling...

philbrad2
11-04-2006, 10:58
It started IIRC with FW and from the books I've seen they make a much better job of it by using much more realistic scenes to cut their models into.

It looks good on packaging but shouldn't be overly prevalent in WD I think.

:chrome:

Estragor
11-04-2006, 14:41
Read my copy of WD 316. Very poor. Only article I enjoyed was the Tallarn/ Taros campaign.

The building battlefields, tau painting guides, rohan eavy metal and vespid index xenos articles were all very basic and lacking detail.

The gaint battle report was just horrible. No back story, no tactics and no way easy to follow the course of the game. Slaught-O-Meter is just lame.

Standard Bearer article by Jervis Johnson was a complete joke. Would have been better having someone who actually knew what he was talking about writing the article. Also contained a very poorly disguised advert for the giant (first paragraph is all about how cool the giant is) which is just not needed considering the entire fantasy section was about the giant.

Paper qualtiy of WD itself not an issue, but the Golden Daemon booklet was very low quality.

Overall, if GW dont get WD sorted out I will probably stop buying the mag.

Killgore
12-04-2006, 22:17
WD 316 was diabolical!

i think i read it in about 1 to 2 hours all the way through and practicaly nothing made me want to reread it, i could use it as toilet paper considering the quality of it


only nugget of any peticular worth was the desert article, thats why i gave it a 2.

Promethius
15-04-2006, 15:11
I seem to remember a time when white dwarf was interesting, with articles on a variety or races, not just whatever was being sold that month, and well thought out background articles that made for interesting reading. I stopped buying wd after issue 299, and since then reading a friend's copy or briefly having a look in store have demonstrated that, unbelievably, it has continued to go downhill. The vespid article set the record for poor effort, and the megalithic 'buy a plastic giant' article was simply shameless. I really wish the guys at WD would attempt to demonstrate some kind of pride in their work, rather than turn a once interesting mag into a puffed-out version of the troll magasine I used to get free with WD.

Killgore
16-04-2006, 18:05
rather than turn a once interesting mag into a puffed-out version of the troll magasine I used to get free with WD.

you mentioned the F word!

doubt you'll ever see a free model or a card building in White Drawf again, I had a small collection of card terrain thanks to WD, that chapel, the set of barricades, the gorkamorka watchtower, I still got the Eldar warp portal pyramid thing

Promethius
16-04-2006, 18:57
I also have a massive collection of cardboard buildings, from necromunda baricades forward, as well as a small collection of free figures.

The Troll magazine was actually a mail order catalogue containing various bits, this being back in the days when GW had enough shame to put the bulk of their advertising into a separate throw away mag rather than just fill the entirety of WD with it.

I get the impression (and maybe I'm wrong) that when Chambers left we lost the last of GW's friendly side.

Flame of Udun
16-04-2006, 23:40
I get the impression (and maybe I'm wrong) that when Chambers left we lost the last of GW's friendly side.

Yeah, I agree with you whole heartedly on that point. I think Andy Chamber's was very much the driving force behind GW, 40K especially.

anarchistica
18-04-2006, 00:19
I liked the pics of the Giant bits, new models and a couple of the Astronomer models. The article about terrainbuilding was decent enough, the art-to-real-life conversions were nice and the thingie about Tallarns was ok.

The rest was utter and complete *****. No LOTR content, no WFB content and a craptacular Index Xenos article. Two ads sporting exactly the same books? Battle Reports with no actual reporting nor battling? An "article" about my fave GW game Mordheim that is not interesting at all?

If 317 isn't a serious improvement i'm going to GW Amsterdam and ask if i can cancel my subscription.

3/10

Pravus
19-04-2006, 09:29
To be honest, WD 316 has marks a nadir in quality for me which is saying something considering its rapid decline in recent times. The magazine has become a shameless and patronising marketing club with which to beat its readership which the readership has paid for in order to be beaten with. Its like some twisted S&M relationship and frankly, I want no further part of it.

Reader: "Hi - here's my four shiney groats"
Staffer: "OK" *WHACK* "BUY THE GIANT!" *WHACK* "BUY THE GIANT!" *WHACK* "BUY THE GIANT!" *WHACK* "BUY THE GIANT!" ...... *WHACK* "BUY" *WHACK* "THE" *WHACK* "GIANT! ... nhhhh-nhhhh-nhhhh"
Reader : "Thanks - I enjoyed that"
Staffer: "Where the frag are you going?"
Reader: "errm, Home?"
Staffer: "Not without a fragging giant you're not!" *WHACK**WHACK**WHACK**WHACK**WHACK**WHACK**WHACK*

anarchistica
19-04-2006, 15:45
Ooh, wow, i did the rating calculation again:

rating / weight
1 6
2 7
3 8
4 9
5 9
6 9
7 9
8 8
9 7
10 6

Votes calculated 315: 105
Votes calculated 316: 162

Unweighted average 315: 5,3
Unweighted average 316: 3,62

Difference: -1,68

Weighted average 315: 5,47
Weighted average 316: 3,86

Difference: -1,61

I remember a friend of mine who worked at GW telling me they lost money on WD... i guess they're trying to fix this...

Helbrass
19-04-2006, 21:00
Basically a catalogue for new releases. The Battle Report is Dreadful. Seems to be pitched at 8 year olds. No detail, and just designed to showcase the new Giant.

evilweevil
20-04-2006, 17:53
Really disappointed in WD recently. It does seem to be getting more and more aimed at kids with the huge pictures/quotes/titles and not to mention the typeface. The battle reports have no substance other than pictures and the 'letters' page seems a little pointless with only a couple and the team columns now shortened to just what they have been painting. If I wanted a catalogue I'd buy it...

On a positive note I do like the individual store focus pieces.