PDA

View Full Version : Has GW pulled it's finger out?



Mad Doc Grotsnik
28-05-2008, 17:38
Linking almost to the thread about GWs slowly improving financial straits, I would like to ask whether or not people feel the product overall has increased in quality.

To my mind, looking at the VC and Daemon books, there has been a definite improvement in terms of the books they are churning out, and I have to say, the new models are also looking like they come from the market leader...

Now, whether or not you find them good quality or not is largely irrelevant, as that is not the question. All I want to know is whether you feel there is a general improvement....

de Selby
28-05-2008, 17:53
Well, I posted this in a thread about 'enjoying the hobby again'.


It's a mixed bag. The rules development side of things has been fairly wonky and inconsistent IMO. I am looking at 5th ed. skeptically.

On the other hand, I think we are at last seeing the benefits of the big switch towards plastics funded by the LOTR boom. The average quality of the new plastics is a step up from that of a few years back, and it may actually be getting cheaper to build certain kinds of armies.

One thing I didn't mention was the artwork and resulting design aesthetic. This was particularly strong in VC, the last book I bought, and looks good for 5th ed. too.

WargamesEmpire
28-05-2008, 17:53
A lot of good deals recently (25th birthday celebration), vastly improved plastic kits, army books that are actually worth reading from a fluff perspective, more support for vet gamers (Apocalypse, Legendary battles) i would say that yes, GW have pulled their finger out.

It was quite sad when GW, the daddy of the Wargaming market were being outdone by smaller companies like Privateer Press and Rackham but I would honestly say that the quality of GW products have increased shedloads this last year.

leonmallett
28-05-2008, 17:54
Yes.


Should I qualify that? ;)

Compare sprues from as little as 8 years ago (Tyranid Warrior/MC upgrade sprue as an example, Tyranids generally then compared to now; other examples will suffice I am sure) to the kind of sprues and models we are seeing now. Now the detail is higher, there is more packed onto the sprue (better value) and the overall design ethos for each army seems much more coherent (look at the disparity between the Ork Boyz which, although repackaged, are essentially older sculpts, and the Ork riders/drivers from older kits which show little coherence). The VC plastics all look to be from a very coherent range to my eye. The marines are a great source of interchangability. The work to create compatability between Eldar plastic kits fielding heavy weapons is another great example.

The books too seem stronger. Simple things like page references in unit army list entries, logical simplification of the reams of (often pointless or even stupid) options available in codexes has gone a great way to improving codex design. I can't really speak for WHFB since I don't play it again (yet), but I still buy a fair few fantasy models and army books and feel they are improving as well (although I still think the OK layout is terrible - great content, just poorly arranged).

Overall I am more satisfied as a GW consumer than I was 2 years ago, 4 years ago, 8 years ago or even 22 years ago (roughly when I bought my first GW products). I believe they are working towards increased quality. But then again, I am sure some others think otherwise. I would just ask those dissenters to ask whether another manufacturer may be better suited to their expectations, and whether any manufacturer can fully meet such expectations, rather than watch another thread be consumed by negative feeling directed at whatever GW is doing.

EvC
28-05-2008, 17:55
The 25th birthday boxes were certainly not good, but their heart was in the right place. They've done a lot of good stuff, and been rewarded with a bit more of my moneys. I actually have high hopes for the Dark Elf army book!

Mad Doc Grotsnik
28-05-2008, 17:56
Fair point, and nicely objective about things as well.

I have to say, I've had my interest in Warhammer renewed ever since the High Elf book. Didn't really notice it waning, but it's definitely back. I now want to start every army they release, which is quite a change!

And yes folks, this is one of those threads where you simply cannot be wrong! All I want your opinion, and reasons for. First person to get shirty (and indeed, all people getting shirty) either about comments on their opinions, or about other peoples opinions, wins a psychic kick up the bum, and a note to the Mods. Least keep it civil. I know we can do that.

El'Flashman
28-05-2008, 18:01
Generally I think GW is on the rise, I think the stores are stuck in a weird 90's gothica time warp but then I do wonder who's to blame for that one. As for the product, apart from WD which is increasingly becoming utter garbage, I feel it's been improving steadily since the release of the Black Templars I've been impressed with the models for almost all the major releases (bar the deamons, but I just think that's down to personal taste) and feel that the army books or codices have gone from strength to strength with the Ork codex and Eldar codex being particularly impressive to my mind. With 5th edition just around the corner, while having been initially sceptical as new information comes to light, I'm finding myself increasingly optimistic about GW's future. I just hope they can keep it up.

escobar
28-05-2008, 18:09
Graphic design seems to have improved a good bit over the years - WD is a lot less clumsy and nice gatefolds in Apocalypse, even the downloadable datasheets are a big improvement (never understood why they exported the living rulebooks with cropmarks!).

Also the new website seems nice - decent sized images of minis.

That said, I do feel sorry for the designers who also seem to have to write for WD as well.

RCgothic
28-05-2008, 18:10
White Dwarf is my main gripe. Where's the fluff? The Short Stories? Can we have some specialist games articles please?

I've also found much to complain about thier proof-reading in terms of simple spelling, both in white dwarf, the new army books and IA:A in particular.

That said, the paints are improving, and the new plastics are phenomenal. I think overall the quality of the modelling side of things is massively improved.

blongbling
28-05-2008, 18:17
[QUOTE=RCgothic;2652188]White Dwarf is my main gripe. Where's the fluff? The Short Stories? QUOTE]

is not all this now supported in the Black Library arm of things with all the novels they produce?

have they improved? i would say a mighty yes. the models are getting better, the rules are getting better, they have been celebrating the hobby more (warhammer 25th as an example)...they inspired me to start a new vampire counts army

deathdealer
28-05-2008, 18:19
I think they may have finally realised what its customer base actually means to them. I think GW made the first mistake that a business does when it becomes big, turns its perceptions of customers from people interest in their product into cash bags, now while i don't expect that to change to a remarkable extent, it looks as if falling sales etc have made them realise they need cash bags with smily faces. I'm happy I now finally have a FAQ for my Wood Elf book, its like what 3 years overdue. The recent codexes and army books that have come out have been great, strong, competitive without being over cheesy and full of fluff. The abundance of plastic kits has helped players tremendously, even if the price has gone up a bit in some quarters. However there are still some areas that need improving, books still require proper proof reading and although i am hoping it is just a temporary setback while some restructuring is going on, the state of mail order and bitz is a complete farce.

thinkerman
28-05-2008, 18:25
Is GW improving???

Honest answer - a huge yes!

So many things have improved from models and minis, paints and hobby matterials, books and novels. It looks and feels like were over the worst of things.

I suppose the turning point which sticks most in my mind was Apocalypse. It was a huge release for the company, it was something new for the veterans and exciting for the beginners but most of all came the baneblade (the start of more big new computer designed super kits) and an influx of cash for the company.

This CASH has been so useful to the company, what with the bad results from the previous 6 months figures. Apocalypse was a good focus for summer preview, autum gaming and christmas presents (Highelves and Harad was in there somewhere but it wasnt a huge release at my local store).

Then with the highly anticipated and about time release of the ORK codex, loads of new fantastic models, articles in WD to support. Vampire release, again with follow up and focus in WD.

The pinicle being the 25th anni party of fantsy - free models, parties, prizes, give aways, limited edition models, auctions etc (please more partys and free stuff!!!)

Now with the release of daemons, moving into 5th edition (which is an amazing book, fantastic font and arragement), space marine codex, drop pods, apocalypse reloaded (new boxsets and formations), Space wolves codex, Dark Elves, Hordes of Chaos and mordor

Its never been a better time to be in the hobby with all this new exciting stuff coming out!!!

Mad Doc Grotsnik
28-05-2008, 18:27
Part of me wonders whether they underestimated their rivals, and overestimated customer loyalty.

It certainly seems they are striving to be the best again (whether they are or aren't is again a matter of pure opinion). Having owned a few rulebooks for other systems, I have to say GWs presentation, layout and content are right up there (unlike Celtos, who used a typeface very Celtic, but also very hard to read. Especially the Green lettering on a Gloss White stock...)

Bitz Orders are certainly billed a temporary thing as they gradually restructure the service, so I guess we'll have to wait on that one (oh, btw, got a High Elf Dragon from work for my Birthday, and will willingly swap the pansy bits with anyone thats got the head and tail from the Wyvern kit...)

And I think blongbling raises an interesting point. GW are clearly aware of the Fluff Market, hence Black Library and that, so is there really any need for White Dwarf to carry as much as it did? Obviously, some background and short stories are required to really fire up newcomers, but the old levels are less necessary at present.

EDIT

Seeing as several people have particularly enjoyed things since Apocalypse, would it be worth putting together some sort of crawly bum lick Petition requesting more of the same? I believe in feedback to companies, whether positive or negative, and I reckon a thank you from Warseer, as opposed to a damn you might be well received and listened to. After all, who doesn't like their ego being stroked? Just an idea by the way...

baphomael
28-05-2008, 19:00
What really hit home for me how much GW has improved are the new bloodletters. Yes, they are very nice minis, but what got me are some of the small details - like the way the face and horns fit onto the main body of the head (having to fit the tongue through the open mouth). While small, this little detail adds a whole lot to the detail of bloodletters. Oh, and the daemon books are kick ass.


As for white dwarf, years ago it used to be worth getting (remember those card inserts, the card watchtower for the gorkamorka release issue, the full tilt brettonian joust game with card jousting arena? How about the old rogue trader era white dwarf that had expansion rules on playing 3D space hulk?) Then it all went a bit pants - several pages of glossy advertisement.

Having said that, I can see it improving. Apocalypse and the 25th warhammer anniversary thing have injected a bit more of the 'useful' stuff into white dwarf, rather than it just being a monthly catalogue. Hopefully, they can keep this up and (fingers crossed) improve upon it.

blackspring
28-05-2008, 19:08
Yes, the quality of the rules/codices is improving.

But, I have noticed that the newer artwork (umm, Chaos Space Marines codex cover... awful) has declined in quality as well that they are reusing older artwork much more than I've noticed before. While my opinion on the artwork is only just that, my opinion, it is an opinion backed by good taste.;)

TwilightOdyssey
28-05-2008, 19:41
Nice spinoff from my thread, Mad Doc! :) I think that not only has GW pulled its finger out, but its in the process of giving said finger a good washing, too!

I think that GW has been making huge strides in the graphics layout since the last Eldar Codex, typos aside. The new Ork Codex was a stroke of brilliance, in my opinion.

The colour plate pics up on BoLS really look striking, too and I can't wait to sink my teeth into 5E!

That being said, the US WD has not been worth the premium cover price for a long time. I let my subscription lapse after I found myself only looking at the pics and skipping the editorial content.

I think that Apocalypse is the best 'board game' available today. It blurs the line suffciently between strategy and rpg game to make it a literal tonne of fun!

El'Flashman
28-05-2008, 19:50
Wow... so many positive comments. I might just go and have a heart attack :)

Melchor
28-05-2008, 19:57
Like the guy in your avatar? :D

For me, GW has indeed improved. The quality of the models and codexes is better than ever (new Orks, new Daemons) and what I've seen of 5th is equally good.

theHandofGork
28-05-2008, 20:34
I believe GW has been improving recently- though this is not to say all is well. Here are some thoughts, in no particular order.

1) WD, like others have mentioned, is still overpriced and barely readable. It has been this way for a while.

2) Codecies have been getting better (the Ork codex is amazing). For a lark I went and found my Eldar codecies (from 2nd to 4th). I noticed the 3rd was significantly shorter than the 2nd and 4th edition, even if you include the Craftworld Codex. I won't even begin to talk about how bad the 3rd edition Eldar Codex was. However...

3) 40k will soon go through an entire edition of the main rules with a significant number of codecies without update. The inability of the design team to do this, or the company's view that is didn't need to be done, is unnerving as a consumer and player. Combine this with the removal of LatD and Kroor Mercenaries, well you get the idea.

4) The transition to plastics has worked out well, with prices often going down and quality maintaining or increasing in many cases. The new box of Ork boyz is a good example of this.

5) Customer service seems to be improving, slowly. Very slowly. The US Community Dev. Team does a good job of this, but I'm not sure about outside the US.

6) New website is too recent to call, but it could be an improvement.

7) New bitz service could be awesome, but it's distressing that the old system was taken down without the new system being ready, or put in place quickly.

8) Not sure where this fits, but the starter boxed sets (MoM, BfSP, & the new 40k one) are really good deals and the snap fit models are, IMO at least, very nice.

So overall things seem to be improving, though there are a few areas that need to be improved upon.

Temprus
28-05-2008, 20:42
Wow... so many positive comments. I might just go and have a heart attack :)
My name is Temprus, I have been trained in CPR, can I help you with your medical emergency? :angel: Gah, I just had to re-certify with CPR recently too. :p

Over the last few months it appears that GW has indeed "pulled it's finger out". Whether they truly have we still have to wait and see.

Gazak Blacktoof
28-05-2008, 20:48
Currently the only GW game I play is fantasy, though I'll be jumping back into BFG in June and hopefully epic once I can locate enough bits to make a necron army <grumble>.

I have mixed feelings about the current trend in army book design. The new armies certainly function well however they can produce some extreme lists that wouldn't necessarily produce a fun game in certain match ups.

I like a lot of the new miniature releases, the new skeletons, grave guard and bloodletters are excellent models. However there aren't enough new releases when army books are revisited, for example its a shame that nurgle and tzeentch didn't get core units in plastic and that dark elves wont be getting plastic fast cavalry.

Currently the things that sadden me the most about GW are the demise of mixed chaos forces, the loss of bits support and the lack of support for specialist games. The first of those I can fix with a house rule, the second and third are beyond the scope of gamers to fix.

Overall the quality of new releases is very good for fantasy but its never been less than that IMO.

GW still has a way to go in supporting its current product range and has taken a step backward in terms of support by dropping the bits range and this is probably the most damaging thing they've ever done to their own hobby.

BrainFireBob
28-05-2008, 20:56
I believe GW has been improving recently- though this is not to say all is well. Here are some thoughts, in no particular order.

1) WD, like others have mentioned, is still overpriced and barely readable. It has been this way for a while.

No argument here.



2) Codecies have been getting better (the Ork codex is amazing). For a lark I went and found my Eldar codecies (from 2nd to 4th). I noticed the 3rd was significantly shorter than the 2nd and 4th edition, even if you include the Craftworld Codex. I won't even begin to talk about how bad the 3rd edition Eldar Codex was. However...

Or here.



3) 40k will soon go through an entire edition of the main rules with a significant number of codecies without update. The inability of the design team to do this, or the company's view that is didn't need to be done, is unnerving as a consumer and player. Combine this with the removal of LatD and Kroor Mercenaries, well you get the idea.

I keep seeing this argument and it seriously blows my mind.

5th seems to me to be the design team taking an integrated approach to design, actually planning codices instead of just doing them on the fly, and since 4th wouldn't support the re-centering of the game JJ wanted, they're coming out with 5th.

There is endless griping about how the system needs to be fixed- they try to fix the core system (main rulebook), and they're slammed for not "finishing" the codex run? Just . . boggles.

EDIT: Mind, they've also set out to fix the most egregiously abused codices, and people slam them for "redoing the popular armies!" Either they fix the game issues, or they don't. They're electing to fix them. Yes, that means another Marine codex, another Eldar codex, another Chaos codex . . .

Thoth62
28-05-2008, 21:51
I keep seeing this argument and it seriously blows my mind.

5th seems to me to be the design team taking an integrated approach to design, actually planning codices instead of just doing them on the fly, and since 4th wouldn't support the re-centering of the game JJ wanted, they're coming out with 5th.

There is endless griping about how the system needs to be fixed- they try to fix the core system (main rulebook), and they're slammed for not "finishing" the codex run? Just . . boggles.

EDIT: Mind, they've also set out to fix the most egregiously abused codices, and people slam them for "redoing the popular armies!" Either they fix the game issues, or they don't. They're electing to fix them. Yes, that means another Marine codex, another Eldar codex, another Chaos codex . . .

Interestingly enough, these are also the ones for which we most often hear veritable torrents of complaints from the unwashed masses about how they're so broken and overpowered.

When was the last time you saw a thread about how overpowering and in need of a fix the Imperial Guard are? Or Black Templar, or Tyranids, or Tau...

I agree with you completely, and I have to believe that many times, people are just complaining for the sake of complaining, and not really because there's anything worth complaining about. It's kind of sad, really.

That being said, I very much agree that GW has taken several very big steps forward lately. It feels like the release schedule is starting to tighten up a little bit, which is a good thing, considering the large number of armies out there, and provided that it doesn't lead to rushed codecies and army books.

The new books that have come out have been top notch as far as I can tell. Chaos, Daemons, Orks, High Elves, Vampire Counts, and Apocalypse have all been fairly well written books, and the new model releases that the books are supporting have been some of the best new plastics I have seen anywhere in a long time.

I'd also like to give huge props to the new direction with the paints. The foundation paints are top notch, and the new washes that I've had the opportunity to try have been absolutely fantastic.

At the risk of sounding like a fanboi (which I might be, anyways)... Way to go GW!

nurgle_boy
28-05-2008, 22:19
Its all good to be honest. over the past 2 or so years, they have started churning out some real quality products, with their own minor flaws (in my opinion, but nothing major at all. im talking about things like 'baneblade too rivit-y', and 'foundation paint pots leak sometimes'), and have, in their own words, revolutionised the painting of gaming armies.
The recent plastics all have a style of their own, and really stand out from the work of other companies as something entirely original, and the casting is very good on them (mould lines ahoy, but hell, the quality is MUCH better!.)

All in all, its looking up!

noneshallpass!
28-05-2008, 22:34
I have the new books for HE and VC and when considering the layout, artwork and qualety of the binding of the books, they have a lot cheaper feel than the older books.

And I think GW needs some new playtesters:D

The new plastics seems good!

And those new washes might make me paint up the lizzards that have been resting in the starterset for more than a decade.

Thoth62
28-05-2008, 22:37
And I think GW needs some playtesters:D

Corrected. :eek:;)

kyussinchains
28-05-2008, 22:46
I think they've stopped treading water and are improving somewhat although this could well be due to the fact that 3 of the 4 WFB armybooks being released this year are for armies I collect, so my excitement is possibly clouding things a bit.

I like the new bloodletters, am lukewarm about the daemonettes (I think the metal models are better) and dont really care for the fiends or beasts of nurgle, most of the vamps models are pretty good, and the new dark elves look awesome so I'm mixed about miniature quality, but they obviously have the capability to produce quality models, so that's a good thing.

Etienne de Beaugard
28-05-2008, 23:42
Quality of GW miniatures continues to improve at roughly the same pace as in the past. Overall, today's models are better than yesterday, and more of them are plastic. GW still has a number of number minor 'misses' among the new models, just like always.

Game rules quality depends on the system. WHFB core rules remain largely unchanged over the last 2 editions. Army books remain within a reasonable range of balance, with a tendency for new special rules to be added.

40k continues to go through its identity crisis, as it waffles between being a complex, detail rich game, with lots of options and a simple, straightforward, and fast paced game. When 5th ed. comes out, we'll see if GW can finally obtain the elusive grail of efficient rules for a diverse SciFi universe.

LotR seems to be producing fairly good product that produces well balanced game. It is definitely following a good trend, but I'm not sure if that is improvement.

Specialist Games remain on life support.

GW customer service and support remains in a downturn, with the slashed bitz system, same-old attitude toward customer feedback, draconian 3rd party internet sales policy, and a White Dwarf that gets glossier but no more substantial with every issue.

On a bright note, the trend of rapid price increases of a couple of years ago has slowed down. If prices remain the same, todays rapid inflation will improve the relative pricing situation without effort from GW.

Overall, GW has produced high quality miniatures for years, and as always, they continue to improve. GW has also produced high quality games for many years. Arguably quality dipped significantly in one of those games, and GW is still working to bring that game up to the standard of the other two. GW seems to have dropped the hyperactive price inflation and release schedule that got it into trouble in the first place.

In summation:

Has GW quality improved? Yes, at a pace consistent with its past improvements.
Is GW out of the woods? No, but it appears to be moving in the right direction.
Has GW's competition improved in recent years? Yes. That said, GW has always remained the biggest player in the Fantasy/SciFi wargames market. I don't think GW will ever actually lose that advantage.

Templar Ben
28-05-2008, 23:47
Doc, could you explain what the title means? I am not sure what I would be answering.

Nkari
28-05-2008, 23:52
Yes, overall GW has improved..

But they still write crappy and unclear rules, and have next to none rules support. (3+ years for an FAQ is not existing rules support imho.. ;) )

- Human
29-05-2008, 00:11
In short, yes, I believe the overally quality of GW's products is improving.

Rules are getting better while adding new twists (5th edition 40k), and the models are improving a ton as well.

ryntyrr
29-05-2008, 00:24
Yes and no. It is really too early to say for me. Right now it looks like they have pulled their finger out in several places. Yet at the same time dug their finger back in a whole load of new places.

So yes and no. Fixed one thing and made a new mess on another. Looking forward to the day when they get it all nearly possibly right!

then there will be no finger pulling. :p

13th

xinsanityx
29-05-2008, 05:11
Yes and no. It is really too early to say for me. Right now it looks like they have pulled their finger out in several places. Yet at the same time dug their finger back in a whole load of new places.

So yes and no. Fixed one thing and made a new mess on another. Looking forward to the day when they get it all nearly possibly right!

then there will be no finger pulling. :p

13th


I'll agree with this completely. Some things are getting better and some are getting worse, or are in the same position.

-Their prices still suck. But i don't think this is ever going to change. They seem dead set on never lowering prices.

-Their game support is still kinda crappy, but the release of all the new faq's shows promise, so they're improving there. I hope it continues and we don't have another year and a half wait. Their support of specialists games is still absent, but i doubt that will ever change either.

-White dwarf is still really really bad.

-While their rules writing was horrible up to the ork codex,(I thought the ork codex was very poorly edited and i thought the highelf book was pretty unbalanced) the demon codex for both systems was very nicely written, and seems to be very balanced, and the same goes for the Vampire counts codex, so there is hope there. Hopefully the new 40k 5th edition rules will continue this trend, but from what i've read about it so far, and the test games i've done with it, its not looking so good. I'll hold my final judgement until it actually comes out.

-As for their models, i've got mixed feelings on this. I really hated the new vampire counts models, just about every single one. The demons are really good though, i love just about every new one they releaseed. I was also very happy with the new ork bikes and trukk.

-Changing the bitz ordering system was a huge mistake on their part IMO. That decision really annoyed me.

40k 5th edition will really be the decider for me. If they do a good job i'll have renewed faith in them.

theHandofGork
29-05-2008, 05:40
5th seems to me to be the design team taking an integrated approach to design, actually planning codices instead of just doing them on the fly

Personally I would prefer 5th to have been a total restart ala 3rd, where the main rule book had rules for every race inside. This means that every list would have been planned, tested and written at roughly the same time. This would have been an integrated approach (of course the release of codecies would have eventually changed this, as happened with 3rd).
I am not sure at how continuing to produce army rules piecemeal is considered "integrated." This doesn't bother me though, since new rules mean new models, WD attention, etc. This brings me to my next point...


There is endless griping about how the system needs to be fixed- they try to fix the core system (main rulebook), and they're slammed for not "finishing" the codex run? Just . . boggles.

It's not just the codex run though, when was the last time a new Necron or DE model was released? A new codex means new toys. So yes as an Ork player I was a bit miffed that there was no progress on the Ork line for a decade. I imagine by now Necron and DE players feel the same.

Of course I'm glad 4th is near over (is anyone not?) but I don't want to wait a decade between releases of codecies, models etc. Since I don't play Space Marines this is still probably going to happen.

On another note, the lack of updates makes me wonder if the design team (both game and model) can keep up with the companies release schedule. I like the continual changes to the rules and models, it means the game is fresh and GW will keep producing toy soldiers. However, I don't want to have to wait a decade for updated rules and models.

In general however, as per my original post, I think GW is improving. Now if they really do have a master plan for just the next few codecies (not to mention the rest of them)... well, we'll see. I hope so, but past experience leads me to doubt this.

BrianC
29-05-2008, 07:32
And I think blongbling raises an interesting point. GW are clearly aware of the Fluff Market, hence Black Library and that, so is there really any need for White Dwarf to carry as much as it did? Obviously, some background and short stories are required to really fire up newcomers, but the old levels are less necessary at present.I disagree with that, at the very least excerpts from the BL books in WD would help BL sales of said books, at best it'll drive sales of figures and improve people's connection to the brand/fluff. The best part of using excerpts is that they have already paid for them to be written, so the cost is minimal.

Its similar for the conversion articles: if it was up to me I'd be putting in themed conversion articles as the new Bitz comes on line, thus driving sales of the newly released Bitz or even just improving awareness of them. Seems a bit daft to me to release something but not shout it from the roof tops when you have your own publication and one geared up to do so.

I think the new foundation paints and washes need some love as well, both make painting easier and quicker, something that should be celebrated. Anything that gets more people painting or models painted quicker is a big win for me, nobody really wants to play with under coated models, even if its not a major problem for most.

Foolish Mortal
29-05-2008, 08:22
IMO GW hace indeed improved recently, especially with the suggedtion that Specialist Games will be getting some more attention in the near future, but hey still have a way to go in some areas.


WD is still pretty bad - has been more wordy of late, but still a far cry from its' glory days.

The bits service - hopefully this will dramatically improve over time, but I still find it hard to believe that this was a fully planned move and not just a frantic cost cutting excercise. As someone else has already stated, why wasn't their a more complete alternative ready to take over when the old bitz service was pulled

Hrafn
29-05-2008, 08:27
5th seems to me to be the design team taking an integrated approach to design, actually planning codices instead of just doing them on the fly, and since 4th wouldn't support the re-centering of the game JJ wanted, they're coming out with 5th.

There is endless griping about how the system needs to be fixed- they try to fix the core system (main rulebook), and they're slammed for not "finishing" the codex run? Just . . boggles..

QFT. My sentiment exactly

IMHO, the new approach from JJ and the design team is speaking volumes. As far as I can tell, they have actually analyzed the whole system and decided what to do with an overall plan in mind. That is good. Really good. Of course, changing course mean complaints, especially from those who can not look beyond their own no-..Codex I mean ;)

Speaking of mind-boggling, I feel compelled to ad my own gripe: Pricing-whining (yes, shoot me, I am whining about whining ;). It's not as much the prices themselves, but the fact that those complaining always mention how "overpriced" GW are. Usually, I then point out that their direct competitors are just, if not more expensive (with factual information to back it up)...lo and behold! Discussion fizzles or devolves into a discussion of quality where the main question is whether companies such as Black Tree is comparable to those three...:rolleyes:

Sorry for going OT, back to the topic - my point here is that GW has improved in the last months. As said previously, the hobby side is really better. The game side, however, is still evolving, and is not really that visible at a casual glance. I do believe the signs point to an improvement, one that will become more clear as time passes.

Layout and background stuff, though, has not improved much IMO. Granted, I have not read the Daemon Codex, so I can't comment on that. Yes, the layout and amount of bakcground have improved compared to earlier Codeci, but since they were appallingly bad, I really don't think that counts for much. When I started to get into PP's books, I was almost startled at the superior quality of those compared to GW. As I have been getting used to PP quality, I am sad to say that the improvement in GW's publications do not account for much, as they are still lacking in comparison. To make matters even worse, this is the only area where PP kicks GW in the nuts as to pricing - I am astounded that PP can output full colour, lavishly decorated and well-designed books with all-new artwork and text pieces for a lower price than GW....To me, that shows that GW has made these things a lower priority than hobby and game design concerns. That is allright, really, as long as it is conscious decision - which I am not entirely certain it is, unfortuntaly. But with the current pace of improvement, I hope GW gets around to do something about it. And I know they can if they want to - looking forward to it :D

Jedi152
29-05-2008, 08:31
Models have improved, and the new army books are superb. They feel thicker and better quality than older ones.

The Empire was good, but a bit bland (it must be difficult to write the basics of background for a nation that's got so much fiction for it). The HE book has beautiful style and class. Pure white pages, heaps of background and tons of gorgeous art (Blanche, Boyd and Dainton must be working their cotton socks off!). VC and daemon books are much the same.

Fiction, background and good art are on the up, which is fine by me. Can't wait for the DE book. It's now at the stage where i buy the books simply to own, not to collect the army.

Osbad
29-05-2008, 09:06
I too think they have upped their game a bit. The Foundation paints and (allegedly) the new washes are field-leaders for quality, which is quite an achievement. Some of the new models have been the best that GW have done (compare the new VC with the old Wight Lord model still for sale).

Where I would still like to see improvement is in (of course) value for money for plastic models (some of GW plastics are set at the same price as metals), and the "tightness" of the rules for 40k - which 5th ed. may deliver.

GW's problem for me remains consistency - (If they could make their mind up about how much to streamline 40k for instance). But there have been some obvious improvements - which they had to make as they were/are lagging behind some of their competitors considerably in some cases.

The Phazer
29-05-2008, 09:52
Hmm. No, I'm not sure I can really say they have I'm afraid.

I never felt the quality of the Army Books/Codexes/models had become an issue for GW - so I don't see any massive improvement there, but none was urgently required IMO.

Modelling supplies are improving significantly I suppose. Apocalypse was a breath of fresh air.

But the ancillary bits of GW's business continue to suffer. Their corporate communications are still woeful for a company of their size. The new website doesn’t seem to offer much genuine improvement as promised. White Dwarf is still a shadow of it's former self and showing very little improvement. They're moving in exactly the wrong direction availability wise (first rule of business: make your stuff as easy to buy as possible, so things like direct only exclusives a rediculous idea). Most importantly, the current disaster that has affected the bitz service is the worst thing to ever happen to the GW hobby in it's history, and shows absolutely no sign whatsoever of only being temporary. It will have a major effect on GW financially over the next few years as the level of inspiring creativity in the hobby falls through the floor and takes a lot of people with it. There's a lowering of support for specialist forces when all they need is rules (a minor cost to GW frankly). Kroot, Feral Orks, mixed chaos lists are all gone, and with them interesting and well modelled armies. Specialist games (always a rediculous concept in the first place) are to all intents and purposes unplayable with the current level of support.

I'm afraid it's hard to see how things are going in the right direction overall though.

Phazer

Sami
29-05-2008, 10:16
Bought the 40k Daemon codex the other day and it is IMO the best put together codex I've ever seen from GW. From a design point of view: the sections and listings are coherant and easily navigated, the colour section is pure awesome, there are very few rules in places where there shouldn't be rules (it would have been nice to have some of the Daemonic Forces section incorporated into the last section and the rules incorporated into the unit listings, but that's down to me hating to flick through the books). Loads of intertesting fluff, and lots of pictures.

From an army perspective, the fact that chaos has been around for a very long time and the traits of the goods have been fleshed out (along with the units!) has helped a lot. There is very little overlap between the different gods ('ettes and 'letters are a bit too close for my liking), the Warg... sorry, Daemonic Gifts ;) are easy to understand and USEFUL.

I'm not quite sure where I was going with this post, other than I Like The Daemon Codex, and those of us who are upset about the missing daemonic animisity rules can enforce their own without ruining their army lists (the only one who really suffers is Nurgle due to the lack of shooty-shooty Tzeentch as backup, but some DPs with range gifts will help fix that).


Also, am I the only person in the world looking forward to 5th edition?

leonmallett
29-05-2008, 10:20
You are not the only looking towards 5th edition. That isn't to say I didn't enjoy 4th, far from it - on many occasions I have stated I feel that each edition (of the core 40K rules) has been stronger than the last - it has only been poorly designed codexes that have been the problem, a problem which I think is being effectively dealt with by GW.

Brother Loki
29-05-2008, 10:55
Doc, could you explain what the title means? I am not sure what I would be answering.

To 'pull your finger out' is an English idiom roughly equivalent to 'pull your socks up' - i.e. to get on with it and actually do something positive, to 'up your game'.

polymphus
29-05-2008, 11:02
Modelwise and artwise, there's been a huge step up since I started collecting about seven years ago. A few slippups (possessed...), but overall I think GW's been getting steadily better since my beginnings in this hobby.

While there was certainly a period of "rules for models", I think, judging from the last few books, they're very much getting back on track.

lanrak
29-05-2008, 11:41
Hi all.
I am in general agreement that the asthetics have been steadily improving over the years.

However it appears that GW corperate managment thought asthetics was all that was needed, and function was an optional extra.:eek:

I am hopfull that this error in judgment has been accepted, and will slowly be adressed.

While I agree the quality of the crafting products and the asthetic gaming related material is high.
The functionality and quality of the rule sets of WH and 40k has massive room for improvments.

IMO, it doesnt matter how cool the game sound a and looks , if the actual game play is not as good as its expected to be , gamers will leave it behind.
(This applies to all games , not just table top minature games...)

leonmallett
29-05-2008, 11:53
Hi all.
I am in general agreement that the asthetics have been steadily improving over the years.

However it appears that GW corperate managment thought asthetics was all that was needed, and function was an optional extra.:eek:

I am hopfull that this error in judgment has been accepted, and will slowly be adressed.

While I agree the quality of the crafting products and the asthetic gaming related material is high.
The functionality and quality of the rule sets of WH and 40k has massive room for improvments.

IMO, it doesnt matter how cool the game sound a and looks , if the actual game play is not as good as its expected to be , gamers will leave it behind.
(This applies to all games , not just table top minature games...)

In your opinion, lanrak.

The statement of quality or otherwise depends on taste - there is no objective standard of quality for something like a ruleset. If a player thinks they are poorly conceived, poorly defined, or simply poorly executed, then they will state a lack of quality. A valid view. Others may suggest the opposite - that standards have been rising and something is of quality. Another valid view. Differing opinions of the same item can be equally valid.

I don't point this out as an attack, but for the sake of balance, whilst you highlight your opinion on the improvements aesthetically, when however addressing the issues you have with rulesets you don't present as opinion (which are valid, even if I disagree), but rather as statement (by not saying "I think/feel/believe" etc which you did for the aesthetic observation you made), which is in essence an attempt to portray a fact. In this area there are few facts since it is all subjective.

Leon.

Promethius
29-05-2008, 12:01
I think that in some ways GW has improved but in others they have continued to slide. Let me clarify.

- WD has been on a steady decline since the early 200s, and is now little more than a mail-order catalogue (we all remember the absolutely awful and shameless 'buy the giant!' articles).
- Codex quality has improved vastly, after the shocking early 3rd ed 'dexes; I think that we are also seeing an attempt to bring the core system into line and improve the rules as per comments over the last few years
- the new plastics are excellent models, and often represent reasonable value for money (I can get 2 squads of plastic guardsmen for about what I used to pay for one of metals back in the day)
- some of GW prices are inexcusible. I'm not talking about the models (which I don't mind) but things like flock, glue and paint, which I don't buy from GW because it is completely unacceptable that they would try to mark up the price of something you can buy for a fraction of the price elsewhere. It probably results in minimal extra profit and adds to the belief that GW are doing their utmost to fleece their customers.
- The Black Library has been an excellent side-project and continues to go from strength to strength, although I still lament the demise of warhammer monthly, which I greatly enjoyed.
- The editing in all GW publications is abysmal. The amount of mis-spellings, non-sensical sentances and punctuation errors is embarassing. I can barely believe that they have bothered to proof read these things at all sometimes. I really don't see how hard it is to read a book over and check that you haven't made a mistake before you send it to be published.
- I feel that we are starting to see a return to the times when each faction would get a little loving in between codex releases, which is great, as we have less of a long winter between a codex being released and an army having support. Releasing the odd unit maintains interest and makes us as collectors feel that we haven't been abandoned in favour of the flavour of the month.
- Apocalypse was a nod to the veterans and much appreciated.

So, in summary, I think that GW is improving, but probably not at the pace I would have hoped for.

ankara halla
29-05-2008, 12:02
In your opinion, lanrak.

The statement of quality or otherwise depends on taste - there is no objective standard of quality for something like a ruleset. If a player thinks they are poorly conceived, poorly defined, or simply poorly executed, then they will state a lack of quality. A valid view. Others may suggest the opposite - that standards have been rising and something is of quality. Another valid view. Differing opinions of the same item can be equally valid.

I don't point this out as an attack, but for the sake of balance, whilst you highlight your opinion on the improvements aesthetically, when however addressing the issues you have with rulesets you don't present as opinion (which are valid, even if I disagree), but rather as statement (by not saying "I think/feel/believe" etc which you did for the aesthetic observation you made), which is in essence an attempt to portray a fact. In this area there are few facts since it is all subjective.

Leon.

Actually, the quality of written rules can be assessed objectively: Are there inconsistancies, are there contradictions, are there typos, do the rules cover everything they should, are they properly indexed, are they properly supported by timely FAQ's and errate when required, etc. etc.

Their quality can thusly be compared to other similiar rules, nothing subjective about it.


What is subjective though, is what kind of rules one prefers. That is a matter of opinion.

leonmallett
29-05-2008, 12:03
Actually, the quality if written rules can be assessed objectively: Are there inconsistancies, are there contradictions, are there typos, do the rules cover everything they should, are they properly indexed, are they properly supported by timely FAQ's and errate when required, etc. etc.

Their quality can thusly be compared to other similiar rules, nothing subjective about it.


What is subjective though, is what kind of rules one prefers. That is a matter of opinion.


Fair points, especially the final one. Duly taken on board.

In qualifying it though, there is a seperation between quality in presentation as you describe, and quality mechanically, which I think echoes your last point.

Brother Loki
29-05-2008, 12:16
@ lanrak - I sort of take the opposite view - I couldn't care less what the rules are like. I'm most interested in the background and the models. For me its all about the aesthetics and fluff, and the crunch isn't especially important. That's why I don't feel the sky is falling every time a new codex or rules revision comes out, since it doesn't really impact on my enjoyment.

Anyway, to address the topic at hand, I certainly feel that there has been some improvement over the last year or so, in some aspects, but some backsliding in others. I think that the design studio has some laudable goals in terms of the direction they are going (I'm talking about 40k as its the one I play most), but I'm not so sure they have implemented them in the best way, and they've been bloody awful at communicating them to the community at large.

The design philosophy with 40k as I understand it is to produce a core of tight rules and highly specific and restrictive codexes to support tournament style gaming, and then to expand on that with things such as Apocalypse, Planetstrike etc to remove those restrictions and encourage creativity and trying new things. This makes sense, but the unfortunate codex casualties such as Lost and the Damned, Kroot Mercenaries etc may be too big a price to pay. This strategy, and the emphisis that its OK to deviate from the tournament style rules, are still not adequately communicated however. Jervis' Standard Bearer column in WD is the perfect outlet for this kind of 'mind of the designers' information, but has sadly degenerated into 'This month's new release is the best thing ever because...'. Closing GWs own forums was a big mistake in my view, as they now have very few channels for direct communication between the company and the gaming public.

Model-wise, I think that there's been some good releases and some bad ones, but that's a subjective view and very much based in personal taste. I like the new khorne stuff, but have been disappointed with the nurgle models, for example.

Essentially, I think that over the last year they have seriously tried to pull their finger out - releases are coming thick and fast, and there seems to be more acknowledgement of veterans and non-tournament style gaming, but there's still room for improvement.

njfed
29-05-2008, 12:23
My main concern has always been support after sale. Like software bugs, you can't just ignore a problem. If the rules have problems, address them with a FAQ.
Print the FAQ web site in everything you publish.
Make people aware of the fac that there is a FAQ and they will find a way to get it.
Claiming that FAQs are bad because some people don't have access to a computer is a cop out.

lanrak
29-05-2008, 12:38
Hi leonmallet.
I was trying to be objective as possible in my previous post.

The quality of the GW crafting related products are high.
They do compare well with the quality found in other manufacturers products.

The improvment in the level of detail and 'crispness' of the minatures has improved, compared to the older minature ranges.

Compared to other rule sets, WH and 40k have a massive amount of room for improvment,in terms of clarity and efficiency, etc.

I did not say WH and 40k rule sets were poor, etc.(Which would have been an opinion.)
Just pointing out there is alot to be done to make the rule sets/ game systems as high 'quality 'as they could be.
(If we measure 'quality' in terms of , clarity , efficiency etc.)

Sorry for any confusion caused.

leonmallett
29-05-2008, 12:54
lanrak - fair comments.

njfed - I think you are right to highlight rules support as an area lacking in quality improvement. In terms of miniatures purchases, I think GW generally are very supportive, but as much as I think they (GW) have improved, the area of ongoing support you highlight is one in which GW let themselves down. If they can maintain a sustained effort with the forthcoming FAQ's in terms of keeping them updated and comprehensive, then that situation will be resolved.

Ward.
29-05-2008, 13:12
@ The phazar: Most of the most wanted/ ones that sold bits will come back eventually and I believe GW has announced plans to begin supporting specialist games in the near future. <== that wasn't meant as negativity about someones opinion, I'm just pretty stoked that they're once again supporting specialist games.


I think GW have started moving forwards, the hobby supplies are worth buying (not the flock though). The latest fantasy releases have been some of the best books to date (They allow for crazy lists, but these lists aren't the most dominant that can be made with that book) .
As for the website, I don't find it all that easy to navigate but it's good to finally be able to know how many models are in the box, the price and what they look like without having to go to a different part of the site.

The Phazer
29-05-2008, 14:03
@ The phazar: Most of the most wanted/ ones that sold bits will come back eventually and I believe GW has announced plans to begin supporting specialist games in the near future.

There's no evidence that "most" wanted bits will come back eventually. GW has already provided the bits service it's made any official announcement of yet, and it's woeful.

At the current rate even providing the top 1% of best selling bits from the old range will take more than a decade, and at that point you may as well not bother.

GW hasn't announced any plans whatsoever for specialist games. There are a few forum posts for it being "a good year" that could really mean anything at all.

Phazer

Sai-Lauren
29-05-2008, 14:36
I'd say treading water personally - the current bitz service is a debacle, 5th edition 40k needs to be THE edition for a good few years, long enough for each army to have their codex released and have the bugs knocked out of it - patch the rules if need be, but don't come up with 6th edition in 4 years time just because some accountant thinks it's due. Same for 6th Warhammer.

There are good points - I think the army book quality has improved (although I did think they were very lazy with the 40k and WFB Chaos army lists - they basically got two loads of money for one set of work). The quality of kits has also improved considerably for the most part, and I think they should continue to expand the terrain kits ranges.

However, I don't think it would take a lot for GW to have major problems again, money's getting very tight for a lot of people and they need something that can keep their customers spending with them, rather than with other people.

They have started to sort things out, which is good. But I'm not sure they've even begun to turn the corner yet.

What I'd like to see is GW basically take a more mature and professional tone with their customers - starting with the store sales staff. You can be enthusiatic about something without sounding like a demented puppy chasing its tail.

Chances are if I'm in GW and not looking confused, I do play something (and if someone does look confused, they're probably buying a present for someone or looking for GTA4).
I don't need to be asked if I play, a simple "how are you today?" or "is there anything you're looking for in particular?" (and to be fair, I do get in my local store, but if I go to another one, it all starts up again) - after all, you don't go into a bakers and get asked if you eat bread.
(And yes I do know why they do it, it's to build up a more friendly customer relationship so that the staff member can more effectively help the customer, and thereby increase sales).

Maybe even phase out the polo shirts in favour of normal shirts to promote the aura of professionalism, and leave the corporate logo on the name badge. I wouldn't go for ties though - I can't stand wearing the things myself. ;)

Make it more of a lifelong hobby than something that people do in their early teens because the "coolest" person in their social circle got bought a box set for christmas and wanted someone to play against, and a couple of years later throw it all out or put everything on ebay when something else has taken its place as the thing to do.

And this might be slightly heretical, but maybe one of the best things that GW can do with their IP is not to use it all the time. So how about branching back out into classic games where GW started?
For example, who wouldn't like a Chess set with pieces sculpted by the Perry Twins or Jes Goodwin? (wooden board and either plastic or metal pieces based on classic designs, rather than WFB/40k/LoTR imagery).

Or even bring Warhammer Ancients into their mainstream lines and promote historical wargaming alongside the fictional universes.



Releasing the odd unit maintains interest and makes us as collectors feel that we haven't been abandoned in favour of the flavour of the month.

I actually said years ago that GW should do antagonist releases with new armies (e.g. if releasing Dwarves for WFB, have a small release of Orcs or Skaven models at the same time) - and whilst the majority of the "all army" releases have been for events (13th BC, SoC, Cityfight, Armageddon), they do seem to be going more in that direction now.



If they can maintain a sustained effort with the forthcoming FAQ's in terms of keeping them updated and comprehensive, then that situation will be resolved.

Aren't the FAQs done outside of GW?

Considering I managed to pick a hole in the CSM one within about a minute of downloading it (allowing rhinos to be taken for a unit which couldn't fit in it due to squad size - despite other armies (Sisters in Rhinos, Marines in Razorbacks etc) not being able to do that in the same circumstances), a could do better is in order anyway.

BrainFireBob
29-05-2008, 21:31
It's not just the codex run though, when was the last time a new Necron or DE model was released? A new codex means new toys. So yes as an Ork player I was a bit miffed that there was no progress on the Ork line for a decade. I imagine by now Necron and DE players feel the same.


Actually, this was apparently a side-effect of the old release strategy- if the comments made were reliable, codices weren't assigned to the "primary" designers too often- there was a large amount of leeway for them to work on whatever they were enthused about.

Net, this means that without a studio designer being a Necron enthusiast, there were no new Necrons, etc.

They've changed their design philosophy, and you're using the signs of the old design philosophy to critique them. If that attitude is too widespread, the negativity will probably cause them to abandon an attempt to systematically, for the first time, guarantee releases for all armies.

BrainFireBob
29-05-2008, 21:40
Considering I managed to pick a hole in the CSM one within about a minute of downloading it (allowing rhinos to be taken for a unit which couldn't fit in it due to squad size - despite other armies (Sisters in Rhinos, Marines in Razorbacks etc) not being able to do that in the same circumstances), a could do better is in order anyway.

You're assuming that's a hole.

Many people have done this recently.

The DA codex allows 10 man squads to purchase razorbacks.

Both codices were written after work on 5th had begun.

We can conclude that the requirement to buy a transport for a unit is no longer whether the unit fits, although it obviously cannot use the transport if it does not.

Much like the 1 two handed and 1 one handed weapon rules are being phased out.

You are *assuming* that was a mistake. Evidence is, it's a design change.

theHandofGork
29-05-2008, 21:50
They've changed their design philosophy, and you're using the signs of the old design philosophy to critique them. If that attitude is too widespread, the negativity will probably cause them to abandon an attempt to systematically, for the first time, guarantee releases for all armies.

I guess GW has gotten better at PR.

How exactly has the design philosophy changed, and when did this occur? You say that codex releases will be systematic and that there is some guarantee that every codex will be released for 5th. I'll believe that when I see it. I would really like a systematic approach to the codex release cycle, but what proof of this do we have?

When I see signs of a new "design philosophy" I may agree with you. But I've heard and read guarantees of full support for all armies in the past from GW. It didn't happen.

Any GW employee simply saying that they will now fully support all armies (whatever that actually means) doesn't mean it will happen.

BrainFireBob
29-05-2008, 22:02
When they announced JJ was becoming design studio head, the associated remarks were:

All armies that received codices in the future would be supported ad nauseum.

That prior to his introduction as studio head, no-one really coordinated the designer's work (the reason his position was created- to provide a central set of guidelines and directions for the studio).

Those are their statements of intent.

Since he took over, we have:

The most abused codices being replaced.

The most out-of-date codices being replaced, with work supposedly ongoing for the last remaining "oldster," the Dark Eldar, to receive a complete design overhaul.

Consistent rules writing and presentation of codices.

Mind, we don't have a full cycle yet. But we have two promises, and we have had results consistent with those promises.

If you'd like to pull *your* fingers out, instead of making snide PR remarks, I'd be glad to discuss it with you. Or you can live in a negative, hating world. Your choice.

EDIT: Realize, work on 5th would have had to begin at that time- all part of re-tightening the rules.

Lucifer216
29-05-2008, 22:28
Personally I think it's a bit of a mixed bag.

Part of the issue as far as 40K is concerned is that what has made Codex Daemons appear so damn awesome (and I love it with an almost unhealthy level of devotion), is that it is immediately compared to Codex Chaos Space Marines. Codex Daemons has way, way more chaotic goodness than its poor neglected sibling. Nonetheless, the overall quality is improving and the number of broken or plain useless units seems to be declining significantly, which is only a good thing.

Apocalypse may have its problems (particularly as it exerbates the problems with a IGOUGO system and imbalanced superheavy matchups) but it combined with tighter codexes is a great approach.

As for fantasy, I could have been tempted by the Vampire Counts. And then they made Vlad and co bald and ugly and gave one of them one huge bat wing for no apparent reason. Tis a crying shame, especially given the quality of the new skeleton and grave guard plastics. Having started with tomb kings and then been mercilessly thrashed by magical firing squad HE armies and gunlines, it would take a lot to draw me back into the system.

I agree entirely with whoever made the point regarding GW's markup on hobby products like paint and brushes. It is immensely counterproductive. I remember seeing a GW redshirt trying to explain to a young boy and his dad looking to buy their first tank and box of guard that they needed about an extra £30 just to assemble and paint and by god it was hard work. I really felt sorry for him. Boxes like Skull Pass help to lower the barriers to entry but with paints at £2 a pop so much of the effort is wasted.

As far as White Dwarf is concerned, I think they need to have a good hard look at it and wonder if it is still needed in this age where everyone and their dog has internet access. Especially with each store having its own internet terminal. Another thing that bothers me is how little original thought and effort goes into the content each month. I am writing this post while taking a break from writing an article for an energy magazine (www.ifandp.com, which covers fossil fuels, nuclear and renewables on a world wide basis). Our team is probably far smaller than the WD production crew and we pump out each month probably an order of magnitude more text then they do.

In terms of overall business sense, I'm not convinced. They dropped the ball well and truely when it came to Dark Heresy. And no I'm not talking about the quality (best RPG ever IMO and I own a small library) or the decision to sell it off. What I think they failed to understand is the potential in miniature sales. It effectively encourages GMs to buy an incredibly wide range of miniatures, allowing them an incredibly varied painting and modelling experience. A couple of articles in WD highlighting this, or even a small range of metal figures for the main character classes could have had a hugely disproportionate effect on sales for its cost.

Finally, I think 5th edition, from what I've heard is going the right way and has the potential to remove so many of the frustrations I suffer everytime I play a game of 40K under the ruleset. "True" LOS is a godsend. The rules also promise to make small blast weapons worth taking again. The real test will of course be halfway through 5th's lifespan when old 4th ed codexes will be feeling the most strain.

<stares at wall of text in disbelief>

Aulbath
29-05-2008, 22:35
Hmm... considering I was about to go Specialist Games only at the beginning of this year, I am now very much looking forward to new "Warriors of Chaos" and somewhat tempted to start a demon army for Fantasy. The possibility of Spaces Wolves by the end of the year makes me feel all happy too. And I can't wait to try out the washes.

They certainly know how to produce good art and design now (there are still a few things I would have done different, being a layouter myself, though), and some of the latest models are just made of awesome. And I really like the new plastic trend. It's just such good material to work with (until you want to strip it of paint)

Though, I still feel they should change their ways when it comes down to Specialist Games. The whole internet somewhat agrees that Manowar, Necromunda, Warmaster, BFG, Mordheim, Blood Bowl and Epic are some, if not THE best games GW ever made... so why so little love for those? Would it hurt to do some plastics for these as well? And would it be so bad to allow non-GW stores to actually stock the SG stuff and sell it? Not everyone wants to order directly from GW and pay shipping and handling (or wasting time finding someone with a creditcard).

AND THEY SHOULD FINALLY MAKE A RE-RELEASE OF THE ORIGINAL SPACE HULK... they could even sell that for 2 or 3 times as much as Macragge is now costing, but dang... SPACE HULK!

But yeah, they are going pretty much going in the right direction... now if Privateer Press would go plastics... ;D

theHandofGork
29-05-2008, 22:38
When they announced JJ was becoming design studio head, the associated remarks were:

All armies that received codices in the future would be supported ad nauseum.

That prior to his introduction as studio head, no-one really coordinated the designer's work (the reason his position was created- to provide a central set of guidelines and directions for the studio).

Those are their statements of intent.
Yes, you've accurately pointed out some company public relations, or to abbreviate, PR. Great. Unfortunately your evidences of GW following up on this isn't really convincing.



The most abused codices being replaced.
I'll grant this for Blood Angels and Chaos. But Nidzilla is still going strong and the new Eldar codex was more overpowered than ever.


The most out-of-date codices being replaced, with work supposedly ongoing for the last remaining "oldster," the Dark Eldar, to receive a complete design overhaul.
True, they got around to the Ork codex after a decade, and IG are rumored to be out end of the year.
However, still no date on DE. You didn't mention the need for a Necron codex either, which is currently six years old, and will be at least seven before a new release (that's assuming we'll see it in 2009). Inquisiton- well maybe we'll see plastic SoB, if they make it into the new codex. Whenever it gets released. Eventually.


Consistent rules writing and presentation of codices.
I more or less agree with this, the the codecies are organized in the same way now. I think the "consistent" argument can be made either way, however.


Mind, we don't have a full cycle yet. But we have two promises, and we have had results consistent with those promises.
Here's my point, I don't trust GW promises anymore. GW also insisted that Squats would be fully supported in the shift in 2nd. GW has made the claim to fully support its entire line in the past, and hasn't lived up to it (see my previous posts). I want to believe them, but have a hard time doing so because of their own record. As I've mentioned, your "results," to me at least, are not convincing at all.


If you'd like to pull *your* fingers out, instead of making snide PR remarks, I'd be glad to discuss it with you. Or you can live in a negative, hating world. Your choice.
I think your post rather proves my point. GW's promises to their consumer base are public relations. It seems like more people believe them than a few years ago. So, as I said before- "I guess GW has gotten better at PR." That's not snide, it's a fairly accurate observation.

Frankly I really do hope GW starts doing what it says it will. 5th edition is a great opportunity for this, but it seems a bit early to call it one way or another.

My view isn't "negative" nor "hating." I've been playing GW games for over a decade now, and because of GW's own actions I do not trust their statements at the same level that I did ten years ago.
I would love it if what you say GW plans to do actually happens, but I'm not going to get my hopes up about it just yet.

Crazy Harborc
30-05-2008, 00:55
Has the quality improved? Yes, IMHO, it has improved.......However, it sure appears that the regimental boxes of 16-20 minies are going to disappear. I am very glad I do not need to buy enough to start an army from scratch, from zero minies up.

For myself (and my old fart regular opponents:D) having the quanity needed of minies for the battles is more important than having "works of art". Our focus is the gaming.....Oh, we do paint them up before we use them. Still and all we "need" minies that rank up and look like what we say they are.;)

Calgacus
30-05-2008, 09:04
I'm not sure they have. I for one am hacked off that the 40k rulebook that I spent, what was it - £30? on less than 18 months ago, is going to be so much scrap paper in a couple of months. I won't be making that mistake again.

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 10:00
I'm not sure they have. I for one am hacked off that the 40k rulebook that I spent, what was it - £30? on less than 18 months ago, is going to be so much scrap paper in a couple of months. I won't be making that mistake again.


But then the question is asked, how far in advance should they announce an new edition? As soon as they do I imagine that sales tail off on the existing product (in this case the core rulebook) so the timing is important in a busniess sense.

That said, in terms of the OP's question concerning: does striving to improve the system (even though evidently painful for you in terms of feeling that you haven't had value for your money) not represent an attempt to improve quality?

blongbling
30-05-2008, 10:11
sales dont really die off over time on a core range like this...GW pulls it off sale and takes a hit in the short term for not selling the product. It would be crazy for GW to tell people 18 months out that they are changing a product......

you have had 18 months of playing games all for £30...thats way better than a PC game and there is also nothing to stop you carrying on playing 4th Ed, noone will force you to buy 5th Ed but the reality is the rules will be different and you will need to kow them. Its just like a new computer game coming out, like i dunno Halo 2 for instance......

Teh other thing to remember is that GW has nearly always worked on a four year cycle for renewing its games

Hellfury
30-05-2008, 10:21
I think it is too early for me to tell yet.

Product wise, all I can comment on is the apocalypse splash release of 3 vindicators as I havent purchased anything from GW since my dark angels veterans boxes (more on that after the vindies).

The new vindicators work quite well with the existing rhino chasis and the kit was rather fun to assemble. It seems that GW has worked alot of the kinks out of their molding process using the new tech.

That said, I bought 6 boxes of dark angels vets and was rea;;;y rea;;y annoyed by how subpar that kit was. Don't get me wrong, there are a ton of great options, but the meat and potatoes of the kit were all flawed. None of the robed marines were completely cast and GW refused to replace them.

Not a happpy camper about that.

I am holding off on opinions wether they are doing better not until after this summer when I can read the new 5th ed rules and see the new SM codex.

I am pretty neutral right now though, leaning towards the negative. But I do have hope.

lanrak
30-05-2008, 10:34
Hi.
I belive GW PLC have eventualy realised that the quality of the games is far more improtant than they originaly thought.
And the GW studio staff are going flat out to release the latest attempt to 'correct things in 40k'.

However , selling a patched version for full RRP, is a bit greedy isnt it?

If I buy a PC game thats bugged and glitchy , the manufacturer releases a free patch to correct the errors.
If they said 'well we forgot about some conflict issues, but the new release covers these , just go out an buy the new version of the game.' How long would that company be in buisness?

This is the sort of negative comparisons GW are generating.
Especialy as there are lots of good rule sets FREE to down load on the internet.(On GW SG web site no less!)

If you assume the gamers will spend 10 times as much on minatures and hobby supplies.Why risk the negative responce to having to buy new rule sets/codexes/army books?
If these were all available for download, they could be updated as required.(Not having to wait up to 10years for the next minature release.)

If GW want to sell books then let them sell 'resource books' with the minature releases.All the detailed background , moddeling and painting guides,etc.

So all the creative asthetic aspects are developed and released in a complete and coherant way.

And all the functional gaming aspects are adressed and developed in a complete and coherant way.

This way the functional requirments are not comprimised by asthetic/marketing requirments.

Just posting an alternative method , that would be more customer friendly.(IMO.)

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 10:49
Hi.
I belive GW PLC have eventualy realised that the quality of the games is far more improtant than they originaly thought.
And the GW studio staff are going flat out to release the latest attempt to 'correct things in 40k'.

However , selling a patched version for full RRP, is a bit greedy isnt it?

If I buy a PC game thats bugged and glitchy , the manufacturer releases a free patch to correct the errors.
If they said 'well we forgot about some conflict issues, but the new release covers these , just go out an buy the new version of the game.' How long would that company be in buisness?

This is the sort of negative comparisons GW are generating.
Especialy as there are lots of good rule sets FREE to down load on the internet.(On GW SG web site no less!)

If you assume the gamers will spend 10 times as much on minatures and hobby supplies.Why risk the negative responce to having to buy new rule sets/codexes/army books?
If these were all available for download, they could be updated as required.(Not having to wait up to 10years for the next minature release.)

If GW want to sell books then let them sell 'resource books' with the minature releases.All the detailed background , moddeling and painting guides,etc.

So all the creative asthetic aspects are developed and released in a complete and coherant way.

And all the functional gaming aspects are adressed and developed in a complete and coherant way.

This way the functional requirments are not comprimised by asthetic/marketing requirments.

Just posting an alternative method , that would be more customer friendly.(IMO.)

What it seems you are asking for is a rule book (sans background), a seperate background book, and seperate hobby books. The GW model for a long time has been a core book incorporating all of these aspects, with other books expanding on them (army books for rules and further background; game expansions such as CoD and Apocalypse; painting and terrain-making guides). I don't think that approach will change any time soon, espcially after the poor response that the small codexes that accompanied 3rd edition had in its early days, lacking the background material that many ask for to be included in the same book as the army list. This was done alonside Index astartes and Index Xenos articles (in WD) and all evidence it wasn't favourably recieved. GW is very much about promoting all aspects of the hobby: gaming, background and modelling in unison, rather than seperating them out.

5th edition is arguably not a patch since it has vastly increased non-game material, as well as the revised rules. If it were just rules alone I'd agree with you, but the hobby is more than just the game engine for many, indeed possibly for the majority. How many play the game(s) on the basis of rules alone? Very few I doubt.

Calgacus
30-05-2008, 10:52
If they had got it right in the first place they wouldn't need to be improving it. I can understand that as technology changes new and better miniatures will be released. But shouldn't they be able to issue a set of satisfactory rules?

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 10:55
If they had got it right in the first place they wouldn't need to be improving it. I can understand that as technology changes new and better miniatures will be released. But shouldn't they be able to issue a set of satisfactory rules?


Can you name any (successful) wargames or roleplaying games company that hasn't been built upon a cycle of renewal? Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?

Again, given the topic (essentially do we individually perceive quality improvements from recent GW products) where do you stand other than not liking that we are going to see a new edition of the game?

blongbling
30-05-2008, 10:56
If they had got it right in the first place they wouldn't need to be improving it. I can understand that as technology changes new and better miniatures will be released. But shouldn't they be able to issue a set of satisfactory rules?

so you cant come up with better ways for teh rules to work then?

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 11:10
so you cant come up with better ways for teh rules to work then?

Does Calgacus work in the Games Workshop Studio as a developer? I am a bit confused. If so, my message to Calgacus would be: Pull your finger out!:p and bring back a few things on my demand list... I am sure everyone else would agree with my demands:p.

If Calgacus is not working for Games Workshop are we saying that we are expecting paying customers to come up with better rule sets than the paid games developers at Games Workshop?

A bit confused to which of the above is right.

13th!

Osbad
30-05-2008, 11:15
Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?

Full Thrust.

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 11:19
Full Thrust.

So Full Thrust isn't on its second edition with a third in the offing? ;)

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 11:19
{Originally Posted by leonmallett
Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?}

Man O War
Mordhiem
BFG
Warmaster
Warhammer Quest

blongbling
30-05-2008, 11:25
Does Calgacus work in the Games Workshop Studio as a developer? I am a bit confused. If so, my message to Calgacus would be: Pull your finger out!:p and bring back a few things on my demand list... I am sure everyone else would agree with my demands:p.

If Calgacus is not working for Games Workshop are we saying that we are expecting paying customers to come up with better rule sets than the paid games developers at Games Workshop?

A bit confused to which of the above is right.

13th!

my bad, my questiosn was that when you come up with a rules set can it ever be so perfect that you dont want to improve it or change things.....

blongbling
30-05-2008, 11:26
{Originally Posted by leonmallett
Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?}

Man O War
Mordhiem
BFG
Warmaster
Warhammer Quest

one could argue that they arent that succesful which was why support was dropped in the first place........

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 11:28
{Originally Posted by leonmallett
Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?}

Man O War
Mordhiem
BFG
Warmaster
Warhammer Quest

Each in turn:

Man O War - no longer in production or supported so irrelevent if we consider games currently supported.
Mordhiem - wasn't this updated with rules revisions in the 2002 Annual?
BFG - I'll give you this. Unless we start talking about Space Fleet...
Warmaster - some revision in Warmaster Armies?
Warhammer Quest - no longer in production, no longer supported, and so of course not subject to revision.

Gaebriel
30-05-2008, 11:30
I think new editions of rulesystems are good and well, as long as they thrive to patch holes and make things better. For clean execution that would need a coherent design system - debatable if GW has one. To me it seems they design/test new armies based on the respective status quo, which is a shifting environment in itself, and not to underlying regularities. Of course, working with GW's legacy of backwards-compatibility must be an undertaking in itself, so I guess the rules we get are pretty good, given they are to be written handcuffed (behind the back)...


so you cant come up with better ways for teh rules to work then?
Do you mean making the current rules work, or making a better rules system (the latter is dangerous :p ) ;) ?

I connect to this remark


... are we saying that we are expecting paying customers to come up with better rule sets than the paid games developers at Games Workshop?
...
in that I wonder why a multimilion-pund company can't manage to do better in the rules sector...

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 11:34
one could argue that they arent that succesful which was why support was dropped in the first place........

Well point of case on: Mordhiem, BFG and Warmaster. They are still going. They are supported by Games Workshop. But not the same way as the three "core games." Which is understandable.

That said the fact that you can still purchase every fleet, warband or army from these games which have been around longer than LOTR states they have been longstanding and succesful.

Just not as succesful as the big three:p.

As for Man O War and Warhammer Quest. I think they are succesful in their own way. Dropped in the days where new games where made every two years and then stopped two years later.

I give GW cudos for being able to keep the specialist range available all these years. May they go and expand for another decade and more! If people played Necromunda they would have second thoughts in going out and buying GTA series (I hope so, worked for me.):evilgrin:

13th!

Jellicoe
30-05-2008, 11:41
Quality of minatures - significantly improves

White Dwarf - utter bile and garbage

Apocalypse - inspired and fun

Prices - on the edge of reasonable - Have only made one model purchase this year - purchases are now carefully considered rather than whim. I have disposable income but I do balance that against perceived value for money

City terrain and WFB terrain - brilliant, game changing and excellent value for money

The rules revamp does irk me slightly as it only seems like yesterday I picked up my copy of 4th ed. I havent noticed all the warning stickers on the copies like they did with 3rd when it was about to disappear. Also narked about the changes to Hordes of Chaos post daemon release

Customer service - in store absolutely first rate but that relates almost solely to Gary and his chaps in the Maidstone store - rest of firm can't really comment

Overall broadly positive but still a mixed bag. The Dwarf is probably a totally lost cause now

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 12:03
Each in turn:

Man O War - no longer in production or supported so irrelevent if we consider games currently supported.
Mordhiem - wasn't this updated with rules revisions in the 2002 Annual?
BFG - I'll give you this. Unless we start talking about Space Fleet...
Warmaster - some revision in Warmaster Armies?
Warhammer Quest - no longer in production, no longer supported, and so of course not subject to revision.

Man O War: I still play it!:evilgrin: It's imporatant to me and probably a small bunch of other guys in the UK and around the world. Hopefully more than 20 people:p!

Mordhiem: No official 2nd edtion rule book. Annual is a FAQ. We including FAQs?

BFG: Thank you!:D

Warmaster: Again no 2nd edition. If you are talking about revisions such as FAQs then I stand corrected. I am under the impression you are talking about revisions as new editions which Is what I think you are stating. If so then all the above haven't been revised into a new 2nd edition.

Warhammerquest: I still play it!

You didn't say "Current games that are being supported".

The point I am making that these rule sets haven't had a 2nd edtion rule book. Also most of the rules are pretty sound with the odd exceptions but are more bullet proof than WHFB & 40k.

Can I add: Inquisitor as well:p... added

13th!

leonmallett
30-05-2008, 12:13
Man O War: I still play it!:evilgrin: It's imporatant to me and probably a small bunch of other guys in the UK and around the world. Hopefully more than 20 people:p!

It may have support, but it isn't an active commercial product which is what we were talking about.


Mordhiem: No official 2nd edtion rule book. Annual is a FAQ. We including FAQs?

Is the annual just an FAQ - no amendments to warbands or rules?


BFG: Thank you!:D

No comment on Space Fleet?


Warmaster: Again no 2nd edition. If you are talking about revisions such as FAQs then I stand corrected. I am under the impression you are talking about revisions as new editions which Is what I think you are stating. If so then all the above haven't been revised into a new 2nd edition.

If the army lists were revised (as I understand they were) thanhat is arguably a degre of revision.


Warhammerquest: I still play it!

Which is great, but it isn't commercially available or supported in terms of products being in production currently.


You didn't say "Current games that are being supported".

I would have thought I didn't need to...


The point I am making that these rule sets haven't had a 2nd edtion rule book. Also most of the rules are pretty sound with the odd exceptions but are more bullet proof than WHFB & 40k.

Can I add: Inquisitor as well:p... added

13th!

No, they may have not had a new rulebook (second edition), but they have had plenty of additional material beyond the scope of their original publication, in some cases replacing material from those initial publications. That a full revision isn't commercially viable (and so hasn't happened), doesn't mean that material hasn't been revised.

Further, would we really class Inquisitor as both longstanding and successful in a way comparable to the likes of Necromunda, Mordheim, Epic, BFG and Warmaster (each to a greater or lesser extent)?

Hrafn
30-05-2008, 12:24
Yes, you've accurately pointed out some company public relations, or to abbreviate, PR. Great. Unfortunately your evidences of GW following up on this isn't really convincing.

Erm, what do you call for instance the standarization process so evident in recent Codeci and the rumoured rulesets, then? Or how certain weird elements of for example the Eldar Codex suddenly makes sense when seen in context with the 5th ed. rules? Wouldn't that be indication of an overall long-term design strategy

I find it somewhat amusing that even positive and explicit communications from GW can be made into a message about sinister and evil intentions. Oh well, this is Warseer, isn't it? ;)


Each in turn:

Man O War - no longer in production or supported so irrelevent if we consider games currently supported.
Mordhiem - wasn't this updated with rules revisions in the 2002 Annual?
BFG - I'll give you this. Unless we start talking about Space Fleet...
Warmaster - some revision in Warmaster Armies?
Warhammer Quest - no longer in production, no longer supported, and so of course not subject to revision.

How on God's Earth can anyone claim that Man O' War was a wellbalanced game without need of revision :confused:
Have you tried and play it with the later additions? IMHO, those are of one the worst examples of bad game design GW has ever produced. The base rules of MOW was quite good and balanced. But the rest? :eek:

Mordheim has been through a revision, not to mention that it builds on a tried and tested core system. Same with Necromunda BTW.

BFG has indeed an ancestor in Space Fleet, but I'll grant that BFG is one of those very few games which hit it right on the head the first time..

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 12:28
It may have support, but it isn't an active commercial product which is what we were talking about.


No, they may have not had a new rulebook (second edition), but they have had plenty of additional material beyond the scope of their original publication, in some cases replacing material from those initial publications. That a full revision isn't commercially viable (and so hasn't happened), doesn't mean that material hasn't been revised.

Further, would we really class Inquisitor as both longstanding and successful in a way comparable to the likes of Necromunda, Mordheim, Epic, BFG and Warmaster (each to a greater or lesser extent)?

Ah then you are right. If you are stating what rule set has never been revised I would say al of them to some degree. But the poster you were refferring to was talking about the new edition of 40k if I am correct.

Not revisions be it FAQs or annauls. I think that is important to clarify.
here is a quote from you:

"5th edition is arguably not a patch since it has vastly increased non-game material, as well as the revised rules. If it were just rules alone I'd agree with you, but the hobby is more than just the game engine for many, indeed possibly for the majority. How many play the game(s) on the basis of rules alone? Very few I doubt. "

"Can you name any (successful) wargames or roleplaying games company that hasn't been built upon a cycle of renewal? Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?"

Am i correct in saying that the above is reffering to new editions. Not just rule revisions? I don't think the poster you were replying to was talking about FAQs and annuals. Maybe the poster can speak fr himself?:D

a bit confused on your last statement then. Are you suggesting if anyone can name any good wargames that hasn't gone through a new edtion. Or Just any sort of revision. If your answer is the latter. Then I would say of course they have. It would be silly not to. If your answer is the first (new edtions) then that's whole different arguement. Which is my case.

Besides Warhammer Quest and Man O War will be back!! (Crossing fingers desperately).

"How on God's Earth can anyone claim that Man O' War was a wellbalanced game without need of revision
Have you tried and play it with the later additions? IMHO, those are of one the worst examples of bad game design GW has ever produced. The base rules of MOW was quite good and balanced. But the rest? "

What later editions?



13th!

blongbling
30-05-2008, 12:42
Am i correct in saying that the above is reffering to new editions. Not just rule revisions?

arent these two ways of saying the same thing?

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 12:49
arent these two ways of saying the same thing?

LoL. That's what I am trying to clarify. Yes and no. Having an faq or annual or small update/tidy up is different in releasing a brand new edition like 40k 5th edtion which is supposed to be allot different/better from the latter.

It's very easy to say but Mordhiem has had a few updates.... but it has not had a new edition with new rule sets. Nor has BFG or Inquisitor which was very succesful for it's launch release. Even Warmaster.

If they pulled out their finger and brought new editions to the above we would not be discussing this :p. But I don't think there is a serious need because the rules are allot tighter than 40k and WHFB.

13th!

vesp
30-05-2008, 13:05
I, [*insert name*], believe that:
GW hasn't bucked up their ideas because [*insert favoured game/army here*] hasn't been updated to my liking in the past 6 months or less.
signed
[*insert name*]

;)

(don't get your feathers in too much of a ruffle btw)

ryntyrr
30-05-2008, 13:33
I, [His Lordship], believe that:
GW hasn't bucked up their ideas because [Man O War:p.. ok Chaos Dwarves] hasn't been updated to my liking in the past 6 months or less.
signed
[His Lordship the paying customer]

Templar Ben
30-05-2008, 13:53
arent these two ways of saying the same thing?

Well they are different. An expansion that has a rules revision is not by necessity a new edition. It depends greatly on the extent on the change. To use an earlier analogy, the first is an expansion or perhaps just a patch. The second is a new game.

I think the issue is in part because GW doesn't do by errata much that they do by FAQ.

theHandofGork
30-05-2008, 14:25
Erm, what do you call for instance the standarization process so evident in recent Codeci and the rumoured rulesets, then? Or how certain weird elements of for example the Eldar Codex suddenly makes sense when seen in context with the 5th ed. rules? Wouldn't that be indication of an overall long-term design strategy

I find it somewhat amusing that even positive and explicit communications from GW can be made into a message about sinister and evil intentions. Oh well, this is Warseer, isn't it? ;)

Yes, as I mentioned the recent codecies are organized and presented in the same way. It was obvious that from Eldar on the codecies were written with 5th in mind.
However, this really doesn't mean they have a long term plan for development. It means they have improved and planned for the next edition earlier then they have in the past- and that's awesome. But to take a few codecies with the same organization and then infer that there is a master plan for every release during 5th edition, well it seems a bit of a stretch. As I wrote in my previous posts, I hope the GW development team does have a well thought out plan for what each codex will contain and how they will interact- but they've never done this in the past. So while I hope they have a comprehensive plan, I won't claim they do until I see it.

How is this sinister? And since when have GW communications been explicit?

Badbones777
30-05-2008, 18:24
As for white dwarf, years ago it used to be worth getting (remember those card inserts, the card watchtower for the gorkamorka release issue, the full tilt brettonian joust game with card jousting arena? How about the old rogue trader era white dwarf that had expansion rules on playing 3D space hulk?) Then it all went a bit pants - several pages of glossy advertisement.
.

Oh MAN-Yeah Full tilt! Id forgotten about that! Yeah the Paul Sawyer years, that whole period, WD was actually half decent!

As far as the thread is concerned, id have to say yes. It could be possible that the competition the OP was mentioning was the kick up the **** GW needed to get refocused. One of the things that drew me back to the hobby after a hiatus was that I loved the 6th Ed army books (particularly for my beloved TK) and the fact that all plastic armies were now not just viable, but looked GOOD. Its good to hear that the compan is getting back on track in a financial sense as well-hopefully they'll make the link, and continue to improve!:)

scarletsquig
30-05-2008, 20:12
Games Workshop has produced several expansions to Mordheim and Warmaster in recent years.

Legends of the Old West
Legends of the High Seas
Warmaster Ancients.

All these games were created by GW (along with the various warhammer historical rulesets), they just don't get much publicity.

White Dwarf 200-250 was pure gold, wasn't too bad until about 310 either.

My flat-out favourite issue was the one that had the brewhouse bash game in it. It was crazy back then... you actually got a fully playable fun game every few months... dark eldar wych combat, battlefleet gothic beta... all complete card section supported and fully playable.

Badbones777
30-05-2008, 20:43
Games Workshop has produced several expansions to Mordheim and Warmaster in recent years.

Legends of the Old West
Legends of the High Seas
Warmaster Ancients.

All these games were created by GW (along with the various warhammer historical rulesets), they just don't get much publicity.

White Dwarf 200-250 was pure gold, wasn't too bad until about 310 either.

My flat-out favourite issue was the one that had the brewhouse bash game in it. It was crazy back then... you actually got a fully playable fun game every few months... dark eldar wych combat, battlefleet gothic beta... all complete card section supported and fully playable.

True, and who remembers the one that used tokens and was kinda like Battle for armageddon and Horus Heresy, but set totally on Horus' battle barge? God that was a great game, and completely free! Wish I knew where it was!

The 2 Black Dragons
30-05-2008, 23:29
So I will post at last.

I have allways liked the questions you have started here, good one

First off I would like to say.

I have been in the hobby for more than 25 years, so no newbee!!
I only play GW fantasy but started with 40k and epic, back in the day

I have allways loved and played Chaos as a full, Beasts, daemons and mortals

I have organized well over 10 larger tournaments and got to know a lot of people and armies

I have won a lot of painting competions and even won at Golden demon

I buy from all sorts of miniature ranges

I just want to state my point, I know what I am talking about and listen to the peoples opinions.

Has GW impoved. Well miniature wise yes and no.

VC miniatures a great improvement but if I see what others have produced over years and it is about time!!

Daemons miniatures terrible!! But Ok that is my point of few. Loved the new army book as a hole. but not the rules. It is the reason why I have stopped playing daemons. It is the biggest bull GW has made. I will not be forced by GW to play the way they want because they want people to play multiple Gods. For me the biggest disapointment of the year.
And I have played daemons since Realms of Chaos.

Miniatures are getting better but also more expensive, do not forget that!! Bitz are great but are not miniatures.

For Vets, come on be honest legendary battles what a load of "muck"
Appo, great at last it would have been the only reason to start 40K. Appo offers and boxes I could not believe it greet value. But my pennys staid where they belong, with me.

25 Aniversary, utter utter Crap! Again just waisted everything they done well before.

Gw might be going the right way at last but they are not keeping the people with open eyes. There are a lot of other miniatures out there that GW cant even reach in quality. Example, daemons they do not even have half the rang so you can play.

Next big thing, Warriors of chaos.
I have only read the "The list that should never have been" quickly and know that the army book will have more depth and be better. But I am sure they will mess it up big time, I just know it I can fell it in my blood.

All the army books that have come out since Empire and this is from a tournament jury point of view and my own is pure power gaming!!!

All armies ar just powering up Cav. and are no fun to play against unless you have your own tournament restrictions.

Quick summary:

Miniatures are getting better but cost more, plastic or not, bitz or not ( see Bloodletters, not one skull extra or chain or something in the whole box)

Rules, roll on the power gamers, power up the cav. Kill the Fluff

Mail order, enough said it sucks, well done GW no one needs bitz packs

WD, I used to get it every week. Since 5 years now way would I buy all that advertisement and Lotr and waste and oh lets just forget it

Service, sucks they do not know what they are talking about, do not know the products they sell and only want to sell (although I do except that they are beeing forced to sell)

7 ed. Rules are great though and I realy enjoied the game and the developement of the core rules, deffinately better


my point of view:
GW is changing but if you ceep yours eyes open not for the better, not yet
There is nothing that would want me to start an army and just to mension the Daemon Legion out of the SoC wanted me to collect a legion so I did.
There are now big wows and I am sure they will mess upo the waariors of chaos as well as far as i am concerned. You can fell it is only big money and as quick as possible

Mad Doc Grotsnik
30-05-2008, 23:55
Hi.
I belive GW PLC have eventualy realised that the quality of the games is far more improtant than they originaly thought.
And the GW studio staff are going flat out to release the latest attempt to 'correct things in 40k'.

However , selling a patched version for full RRP, is a bit greedy isnt it?

If I buy a PC game thats bugged and glitchy , the manufacturer releases a free patch to correct the errors.
If they said 'well we forgot about some conflict issues, but the new release covers these , just go out an buy the new version of the game.' How long would that company be in buisness?

This is the sort of negative comparisons GW are generating.
Especialy as there are lots of good rule sets FREE to down load on the internet.(On GW SG web site no less!)

If you assume the gamers will spend 10 times as much on minatures and hobby supplies.Why risk the negative responce to having to buy new rule sets/codexes/army books?
If these were all available for download, they could be updated as required.(Not having to wait up to 10years for the next minature release.)

If GW want to sell books then let them sell 'resource books' with the minature releases.All the detailed background , moddeling and painting guides,etc.

So all the creative asthetic aspects are developed and released in a complete and coherant way.

And all the functional gaming aspects are adressed and developed in a complete and coherant way.

This way the functional requirments are not comprimised by asthetic/marketing requirments.

Just posting an alternative method , that would be more customer friendly.(IMO.)

This could also be played up somewhat in the PR stakes....

You see, if you bring in your old Rulebook, when you buy the new one, they could give you £10 off. Reward for longer term gamers, and kudos for the recycling effort.

Perhaps this will happen. You never can tell.

Damien 1427
31-05-2008, 11:07
Games Workshop has produced several expansions to Mordheim and Warmaster in recent years.

Legends of the Old West
Legends of the High Seas
Warmaster Ancients.

All these games were created by GW (along with the various warhammer historical rulesets), they just don't get much publicity.

...What? LOTOW is based on Lord of the Rings, and presumably so is LOTHS. They have no link to Mordheim at all.

Regardless, I do think GW is on the up in some respects, such as the models and the quality of some of their supplements (Such as LOTOW or Codex Orks). However White Dwarf is still trash, the website is a farce, Mail Order is a joke and the Specialist Games division is practically dead for official purposes. Throw in some books which I consider to be wastes of dead tree and we've a company I find it hard to pay a great deal of attention to.

Don't get me wrong, they make some rather nice toy soldiers. Just I can find better ways to play with them, instead of paying £30 for the privelage.

scarletsquig
31-05-2008, 22:27
...What? LOTOW is based on Lord of the Rings, and presumably so is LOTHS. They have no link to Mordheim at all.

I have the LOTHS book on my desk... most of the rules in it are almost a straight copy+paste from mordheim with modifications and add-ons. The combat system is lotr, which plays a lot better than fantasy at the skirmish level, everything else is either mordheim or gorkamorka mods.

I consider the legends books to be Mordheim 2.0 anyway... closest thing we're going to get to a decent new skirmish game from GW.

And even better is the open-source nature of the book.. no attempts to tie down people into using GW miniatures because GW doesn't make historicals and never will. The last page of the book even lists dozens of different manufacturers... most of which are 30-50% cheaper than GW.

DonkeyMan
01-06-2008, 23:48
Personally I would say that it's too early to say really.

Some things got better, some stayed the same and some went worse.
Time will tell.

BrainFireBob
03-06-2008, 06:51
Yes, as I mentioned the recent codecies are organized and presented in the same way. It was obvious that from Eldar on the codecies were written with 5th in mind.
However, this really doesn't mean they have a long term plan for development. It means they have improved and planned for the next edition earlier then they have in the past- and that's awesome. But to take a few codecies with the same organization and then infer that there is a master plan for every release during 5th edition, well it seems a bit of a stretch. As I wrote in my previous posts, I hope the GW development team does have a well thought out plan for what each codex will contain and how they will interact- but they've never done this in the past. So while I hope they have a comprehensive plan, I won't claim they do until I see it.

How is this sinister? And since when have GW communications been explicit?

With your attitude that it's all PR if they issue a statement they then behave consistently with, if they ever change their paradigm, it can be claimed as "evidence they haven't changed."

Let's be honest. You've admitted you don't trust their promises, and your comments reveal an active distrust. I stand by my observation: We've seen behavior consistent with those promises. If they make a full cycle, or far and away the majority of one, we'll know.

Also, as regards Necrons: There are older codices, and codices that are more abusive. To fix the game, which a few years ago was in terrible shape, meant certain priorities- and Necrons, with their mere five year old codex, were not a priority, compared to Orks or Eldar, whereas Eldar and Chaos desperately needed a tone-down.

Current Eldar aren't nearly as bad as the old ones. There's one powerbuild still, sure- one is a hell of a lot better, especially considering what that powerbuild consists of, than what we had before. Boxing Warlocks, Starcannon spam, and disruption tables, if you recall. And since that powerbuild primarily revolves around the combination of several rules and pieces of kit (primarily the kitted-out Falcons), overlooking the impact of the permutation speaks to an error, not incompetence or a failure to attempt a correction (ie, the argument that "there's still a powerbuild, therefore the designers aren't trying to fix the game" is an erroneous fallacy).

The argument that "Necrons are seven years old" only holds water if one doesn't consider the number of armies, vs. the number of yearly release slots available.

Fallen_star
03-06-2008, 11:58
I have to say its a tough question weather there actually improving quality or not.

Models:
having ups and downs but overall id say the qualitys greatly increased my only qualms would be with some of the sculpting.Though i'd like to mention how it galls me that they shrink the quantity of miniatures per box whilst upping the price.

Fluff:
I've never really minded i gave up on strong feelings on fluff when i realised how long the end of the 41st millenia has taken....

White dwarf:
This got me into the hobby in the first place but i stopped buying it nearly two years ago and just look through the store copy, it looks better but put it next to almost any gaming magazine (similar if slightly older age bracket) and it boggles my mind how they get away with it.

My main grip to be fair is that theres just no originality in fact some of it seems to be slowly getting killed off.There seems to be a trend of removing options from the codexs and making only one army able to do said 'trick' rather than multiple armies being capable of doing it in differant ways.

Also theres this niggling feeling i get when reading the 5ed rumours and how much it seems like there pinching stuff from WFB to use in 40k.

Hrafn
03-06-2008, 16:10
"How on God's Earth can anyone claim that Man O' War was a wellbalanced game without need of revision
Have you tried and play it with the later additions? IMHO, those are of one the worst examples of bad game design GW has ever produced. The base rules of MOW was quite good and balanced. But the rest? "

What later editions?


"Additions", not editions ;) I am thinking of those with the Dwarfs and Dark Elves, not to mention the atrocious "official" WD/Journal based fleets. They were all IMO unbalanced internally and compared to the original boxed set. Sorry for going OTT!


Yes, as I mentioned the recent codecies are organized and presented in the same way. It was obvious that from Eldar on the codecies were written with 5th in mind. However, this really doesn't mean they have a long term plan for development. It means they have improved and planned for the next edition earlier then they have in the past- and that's awesome. But to take a few codecies with the same organization and then infer that there is a master plan for every release during 5th edition, well it seems a bit of a stretch. ?

So, you believe that there are indications for long term planning, but that they aren't indications of long term planning? :confused:
We have seen indisputable indications of the existence of overarching design rules, so I can't really see that it's such a stretch to believe they exist?
BTW, I never said anything about a master plan for the next 10 years of GW's life (which is probably how long it will take to update everything ;) ), I tried to argue that the devs have a set of design rules now, and that apparently they will stick to them in the foreseeable future.


How is this sinister? And since when have GW communications been explicit?

Well, mainly because that seem to be how you perceive GW. What I can infer from your posts is that you intensely distrust GW, and as long as you keep that mentality, every action from them will seem sinister....

Noone ever claimed that GW is a master of explicit communications. I'd gladly agree that the opposite is the exact case. Which is why we must infer what is going on from implicit actions instead. Off course, that means we are all free to interpret these as we may, including those with a bit more biased perception than me.

MadParr
03-06-2008, 19:39
Is GW Improving?

“Just because you don’t know what I’m doing, doesn’t mean I don’t know what I’m doing.” – Camp proverb

First, some background. I’ve been playing 40K since Rogue Trader – all four and soon five editions of the rules. I’ve only been playing Fantasy since fifth edition (or was it sixth?) I’ve played Gorkamorka, Mordheim, Battlefleet Gothic and I think I played Blood Bowl once… I’ve been buying minis and White Dwarf magazines since sometime in 1987. I’ve got two gaming tables in my basement, a regular gaming group, two companies of Dark Angels, plus half of the Deathwing and nearly half the Ravenwing, 2500-ish point of Zombie Pirates (Yarr! Brains!) and 2000-ish points of Bretonnians. I’ve done demos for Independent Retailers, taught kids how to play and paint (including my own) and even did a short tour as a redshirt (but don’t hold it against me just yet).

Here’s my thoughts…

I loved playing Rogue Trader. I loved playing 2nd. I loved playing 3rd. I love playing 4th. I’ll bet I’ll have a good time playing 5th. Overall I think each had its improvements over the previous and learned from its weaknesses. Am I buying 5th? Of course. Am I going to buy 10th? Probably. I like new editions, they mix it up for me. Of course after four editions I often find myself referencing the rule book (not that that’s a bad thing) as I half remember rules from a previous edition. I feel that same way when a new codex gets released it keeps the game “fresh” and keeps me on my toes. The quality of the written product has also improved overall since ’87. I enjoy trying out the “new” rules, and I doubt I’d still be playing Rouge Trader after 20 years if nothing had changed. My model collecting started with some single OOP Imperial Guard / Space Adventurers that I was lucky enough to purchase from an Independent Retailer for something like one dollar a mini. This quickly changed to the old RTB01 plastic “beakies” (90 Marines, 90 dollars! My opinions on price later…), a handful of rhinos, one “old” Land Raider and some metal Terminators. Comparing the quality of miniatures over two decades is night and day I can’t wait to see what the next twenty years will bring! White Dwarf… You know, I really liked issue 300, I’d love it if they were all that good. I buy a Dwarf when there’s something interesting in it, I’ve never had a subscription, probably never will – but then again, I like going in to the GW to browse through it before I decide to buy one. Besides, this is the information age right? With the number of discussion groups, blogs, websites and whatnot most of my reading material doesn’t come with a glossy cover.

Pricing (WARNING: Canadian Content, eh!) deserves its own paragraph. I wholeheartedly agree with an earlier statement in this thread; “Games Workshop products are luxury items.” I am willing to pay luxury prices for quality luxury items. I am willing to pay sticker price for items that I’d truly like to own. I am more than happy to support local independent retailers and GW Hobby Centres who supply me with the products that I love. I like to think (true or not) that the money I spend goes on not only to provide jobs and income to fellow Canadians and support the local economy but also to the “value added” types of things like Games Days, Rogue Trader Tournaments, special events, School Educational Programs (especially the Hamilton – Wentworth Literacy Program, “Read to Succeed”) , et al. You want to know which items I think should cost less? Food. Shelter. Health Care. I have an income which allows me to both support charities and also allows me to purchase the occasional luxury item for myself, my family and my friends – I’m one of the lucky ones. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve attended the store / bunker auctions looking for a deal or two, but just as much for the sheer entertainment value of the event (“…Great for Apocalypse!”) and bought the occasional bit online when I didn’t need a whole box of stuff when all I really want is the Powder Monkey…

Is GW doing a good job? Yes.
Is there room for improvement? Yes, there always is.
Just because something isn’t “perfect” doesn’t mean it’s broken.
When the new stuff is better than the old it doesn’t mean the old stuff was crap, that’s innovation!

Ok, so I was a (part-time) redshirt. Why? I did it as an extension of my hobby. I did it for an extra buck when my wife went back to school. I did it for the love of the games and to share my enthusiasm with others. I had a great time even when I was sweeping the floor. Red/Black/Blue-shirts are enthusiastic gamers just like you and me. Was I brainwashed by the company? Heck no, I was brainwashed by the fantastic games and years before I worked for the company.

What would I like to see from Games Workshop? I’d like to see them make donations to toy drives. I’d like to see a company team out for Run for the Cure, Habitat for Humanity, etc. I’d like to see their books donated to local libraries and a continuation and even expansion of their School/Library educational programs. I’d like to see innovations in manufacturing to keep costs down while still producing quality miniatures, even passing that savings down to the customer.

On a lighter note:

“Can you name any (successful) wargames or roleplaying games company that hasn't been built upon a cycle of renewal? Any successful and longstanding games that haven't had at least one revision?” – leonmallett

Parker Brothers’ Monopoly? (Come on, anyone who plays Monopoly KNOWS it’s a wargame! It even has miniatures!)

:D