Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/10/16 22:48:07
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
According to you, Transformers 3 either shouldn't have been made or should have been in some way much different (it was made, it was the same).
Actually, there were a number of differences in Transformers 3 as a result of customer feedback from the first two (like the slowed-down transformations, for example). Sure, they didn't change everything that everyone complained about... but they at least listened to the complaints.
The Internet is the Chaos god of Hatred.
And again with this weird assumption that the complaints are just an internet thing.
2014/10/17 00:18:45
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Don't assume that those who criticize GW are brainless haters (well maybe some)
Most of us don't want to see the company we grew up with and love, destroy themselves with
illogical business decisions.
GW is slowly killing their own market share and we as concerned consumers, have a right to
voice those concerns.
It is like when the American car industry was ignorant of the Japanese car makers, "Our gas gussling
huge unsafe car are okay, no one wants these tiny cheap fuel efficient cars!" well you know how that went.
They changed with the market.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/17 00:19:11
Colpicklejar wrote: TotalBiscuit explained that listening to his subscribers turned something he loved into a complete agony. He developed CANCER, for God's sake.
Wow. That's probably the best example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I've ever seen.
And ignoring your customer base is lunacy.
DarknessEternal wrote: Well, Dakka is probably the most civilized discussion forum on the topic, and it's a cesspool of hatred and bitterness as far as the eye can see, up to and including its moderators. So, yes.
And DimnessEternal returns, never failing to amuse.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/17 05:16:06
Colpicklejar wrote: TotalBiscuit explained that listening to his subscribers turned something he loved into a complete agony. He developed CANCER, for God's sake.
Wow. That's probably the best example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I've ever seen.
And ignoring your customer base is lunacy.
DarknessEternal wrote: Well, Dakka is probably the most civilized discussion forum on the topic, and it's a cesspool of hatred and bitterness as far as the eye can see, up to and including its moderators. So, yes.
And DimnessEternal returns, never failing to amuse.
Both myself and DarknessEternal were arguing that the internet is a hateful place. Your response to this argument is to call us both morons. THANKS, BRO.
5000
Who knows?
2014/10/17 14:01:25
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Colpicklejar wrote: TotalBiscuit explained that listening to his subscribers turned something he loved into a complete agony. He developed CANCER, for God's sake.
Wow. That's probably the best example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I've ever seen.
And ignoring your customer base is lunacy.
DarknessEternal wrote: Well, Dakka is probably the most civilized discussion forum on the topic, and it's a cesspool of hatred and bitterness as far as the eye can see, up to and including its moderators. So, yes.
And DimnessEternal returns, never failing to amuse.
Both myself and DarknessEternal were arguing that the internet is a hateful place. Your response to this argument is to call us both morons. THANKS, BRO.
DarknessEternal wrote: Well, Dakka is probably the most civilized discussion forum on the topic, and it's a cesspool of hatred and bitterness as far as the eye can see, up to and including its moderators. So, yes.
DarknessEternal wrote: No, that's your delusional belief. If a company is still making money, they'd be foolish to care what a horde of screaming idiots say.
Calls Dakka Dakka a cesspool and a horde of screaming idiots
> complains about hatred and bitterness.
DE is as much a part of that "cesspool of hatred and bitterness" as everybody else.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/17 14:01:50
2014/10/17 14:04:16
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Colpicklejar wrote: TotalBiscuit explained that listening to his subscribers turned something he loved into a complete agony. He developed CANCER, for God's sake.
Wow. That's probably the best example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I've ever seen.
And ignoring your customer base is lunacy.
DarknessEternal wrote: Well, Dakka is probably the most civilized discussion forum on the topic, and it's a cesspool of hatred and bitterness as far as the eye can see, up to and including its moderators. So, yes.
And DimnessEternal returns, never failing to amuse.
Both myself and DarknessEternal were arguing that the internet is a hateful place. Your response to this argument is to call us both morons. THANKS, BRO.
Please indicate where H.B.M.C. has called you or DarknessEternal a moron. If possible do it by bolding and changing the colour of the statement where he says it...
Criticism of your opinions isn't the same as a personal insult and you guys really should let go of that persecution complex that you seem to have, it is getting kind of old.
2014/10/17 14:22:28
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Both myself and DarknessEternal were arguing that the internet is a hateful place. Your response to this argument is to call us both morons. THANKS, BRO.
Yeah, no one called you a moron. They said your arguments such, which they do, but never attacked your person.
The closest I can see is HBMC called Darkness Eternal, Dimness Eternal.
Either way, its pretty comical how the two of you come here to tell us how awful of a place Dakka is. You don't see the irony? And don't confuse pointing out the errors in your argument for calling you a moron.
The 'THANKS, BRO' really convinces me you're here looking for a rational debate, rather than incite some sort of inflammatory responses by calling this place a cesspool.
Maybe try being less hyperbolic and negative in your posts?
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
2014/10/17 14:26:12
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Let's not get distracted by some people attacking posters who express criticism for GW or who are trying to defend some of their actions by getting all ad hominem.
Anyone who's been around for more than a little bit knows this is ultimately where these threads end up heading because mud slinging is all anyone defending the IP moat and Copyright Castle has, but it only works if we let it.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: Let's not get distracted by some people attacking posters who express criticism for GW or who are trying to defend some of their actions by getting all ad hominem.
Anyone who's been around for more than a little bit knows this is ultimately where these threads end up heading because mud slinging is all anyone defending the IP moat and Copyright Castle has, but it only works if we let it.
I do find it amusing that all these type of threads inevitably get closed because the pro-GW crowd can't bring up anything other than how people are whiners and shouldn't come here if they no longer play, while not refuting any actual points raised.
This is what, the tenth such thread in the past few months alone?
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2014/10/17 18:46:49
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Azreal13 wrote: Let's not get distracted by some people attacking posters who express criticism for GW or who are trying to defend some of their actions by getting all ad hominem.
Anyone who's been around for more than a little bit knows this is ultimately where these threads end up heading because mud slinging is all anyone defending the IP moat and Copyright Castle has, but it only works if we let it.
True words.
All they can do is launch baseless negative attacks. Let's keep it civil and rational.
GW's business practices are indefensible.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/10/17 18:50:55
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Azreal13 wrote: Let's not get distracted by some people attacking posters who express criticism for GW or who are trying to defend some of their actions by getting all ad hominem.
Anyone who's been around for more than a little bit knows this is ultimately where these threads end up heading because mud slinging is all anyone defending the IP moat and Copyright Castle has, but it only works if we let it.
True words.
All they can do is launch baseless negative attacks. Let's keep it civil and rational.
GW's business practices are indefensible.
I wouldn't say indefensible. I would say illogical for a company seeking long term health and continued market growth.
But someone will surely find a way to defend them. They always do
$285+ for rules from a company that does not want to make your rules for you.... mmmkay
Yep. When the cost of your mandatory rulebooks is more than the cost of an army from the company putting out their rules for free you can't claim you 'are a model company, not a rules company'.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
2014/10/18 00:14:26
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
$285+ for rules from a company that does not want to make your rules for you.... mmmkay
And that's why I quit playing 40k with my orks
Yeah...today I was feeling a bit interested in the new DE book since it seems like it's not too bad. But since I haven't gotten the 7th ed. Main Rulebook, I'm looking at at least $135 to make that book functional. And who knows how long these books will be around- were GW to say "we hope to use these new 7th codexes as a jumping-off point to focus on additional 40k rules materials" as opposed to their current 2 year-ish cycle per book, I might actually get them. But I'm not about to be burned again, for even *more* money than previous editions!
That and I look at the RPG books running around, chock-full of seriously-worked-over content, and I can't understand why a codex whose unit pictures are all just photos of studio models is worth that much.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/18 00:25:58
2014/10/18 02:11:06
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/18 02:11:51
Shadowkeepers (4000 points)
3rd Company (3000 points)
2014/10/18 02:17:29
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
GW is not the hobby. I love the hobby of wargamming but I don't like what GW is doing for the hobby.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/10/18 02:19:06
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
GW is not the hobby. I love the hobby of wargamming but I don't like what GW is doing for the hobby.
GW or no, you can't deny that wargamers are critical of everything.
Shadowkeepers (4000 points)
3rd Company (3000 points)
2014/10/18 02:25:37
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Yeah, there's no reason the rules from all the Ork sources now couldn't have been included in a single codex, as an example. Even the fluff and pictures and art aren't anything worth buying from what I've seen. Hell, the new IG codex offered very little in new fluff and art, and we lost a lot of characters and small stuff, while gaining a few things of mixed usefulness.
I get that GW is a business that needs to make money. I can't understand that their business practices are conducive to any long term survival though. Releasing codices with less everything and shoring it up with dataslates, supplements and other nonsense later is just going to either bleed customers or turn them towards alternatives. The numbers for this Christmas will tell how this strategy has been working, but I can't see it working well.
All I know is that cutting content and re-selling it later for more is not a recipe for success.
I can't understand anyone who actually supports the trend of cutting content from codices; be they characters or wargear options, or units entirely, its entirely a negative aspect that can only be mitigated by adding new content of equal or greater status. Most new codices haven't done that, and while, for example, the latest IG dex gained tank commanders, the Wyvern, the Taurox, and Bullgryns, it lost most characters and many wargear options, as well as losing most of the arty section.
I shouldn't have to put together a list of pros and cons for a new editions codex.
You'd think a new codex for a new edition would have learned from the mistakes of the last one and build off that.
Anyways, I'm just bitter about my IG. The new dex just lacks any real soul. Much like most of GW's latest offerings, despite people claiming things like the new DE codex being the most unique codex so far.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
GW is not the hobby. I love the hobby of wargamming but I don't like what GW is doing for the hobby.
GW or no, you can't deny that wargamers are critical of everything.
I can actually.
Go to Warmachine's or Infinity's forums. You'll see a great deal of positivity. All that has to happen is for the company to give them things to be positive about.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/18 02:27:08
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/10/18 04:15:34
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
GW is not the hobby. I love the hobby of wargamming but I don't like what GW is doing for the hobby.
GW or no, you can't deny that wargamers are critical of everything.
I can actually.
Go to Warmachine's or Infinity's forums. You'll see a great deal of positivity. All that has to happen is for the company to give them things to be positive about.
And if I'd said that wargamers are whiny and see no good in anything, I would understand your reply. I did not, in fact, say that. I merely pointed out that wargamers are critical of their hobby.
And as Blacksails wrote, enthusiasts are like that. It wasn't an insult so stop replying as though it was.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/18 04:15:55
Shadowkeepers (4000 points)
3rd Company (3000 points)
2014/10/18 04:35:15
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
But people are not very critical about wargaming in general. Its just GW. You can't blame the community when those same people have few if any bad things to say about Warmachine, infinity, x wing and the like.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
2014/10/18 05:16:46
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
If this were a video game company, I'd just 'lol' at everyone bitching and point at the massive sales being made in lieu of the tsunami of complaints. But, oddly, for every one person I see defending GW (or rather commenting that it's not too bad) I find five people pointing out just how bad things are. Generally, I find that the wargaming community (and by extension, this site) tends to be exceedingly critical of every aspect of the hobby - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when we shell out thousands of dollars for it.
GW's target market is people who are happy to spend huge amounts of money on GW stuff.
This strategy has been developed in the past few years and its ultimate expression is the splitting of rulebooks into multiple, more expensive separate items.
We will see in January how successful this strategy has been.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/18 05:27:56
jonolikespie wrote: But people are not very critical about wargaming in general. Its just GW. You can't blame the community when those same people have few if any bad things to say about Warmachine, infinity, x wing and the like.
1 - Yes, they are. Being critical isn't an insult.
2 - I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I made a statement about how GW is following the path of many video games developers (look at EA) and that the wargaming community notices this. My comment on wargamers being critical of their hobby is somehow being misconstrued into "everyone hates GW", when that's not what I said at all.
Shadowkeepers (4000 points)
3rd Company (3000 points)
2014/10/18 06:26:57
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
jonolikespie wrote: But people are not very critical about wargaming in general. Its just GW. You can't blame the community when those same people have few if any bad things to say about Warmachine, infinity, x wing and the like.
1 - Yes, they are. Being critical isn't an insult.
2 - I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I made a statement about how GW is following the path of many video games developers (look at EA) and that the wargaming community notices this. My comment on wargamers being critical of their hobby is somehow being misconstrued into "everyone hates GW", when that's not what I said at all.
Apologies if I misinterpreted your statement. I thought you were saying that gammers were critical of everything. (and thus could never be appeased.) But I think I understand what you're saying now.
GW is going the route of day one DLC. All the codexes are boring and bland so you can pay more to get the good stuff added on.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/10/18 09:13:39
Subject: Re:A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
Frankenberry wrote: I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but have you all noticed how GW has opted for the 'DLC' route of releases since the drop of seventh/end of sixth? I mean, whoever posted that Ork codex/supplement/core rulebook breakdown hit the nail pretty much on the head. They break down a pretty simple product, that's already working between say, two books (codex and rulebook), into multiple supplements, a more expensive rulebook that caters more to the competitive circuit (with little or worse updates done to an already archaic ruleset), and then up the price of everything 15-35%.
I've got the 2E Chaos codex sitting on my shelf. As well as the "standard" Chaos Marine units, it also has daemons, and variant lists for the Red Corsairs, Daemon World and Chaos Cult armies. I think it came out for £15 back in the day. How much do you reckon all those options would set me back now?
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
2014/10/18 11:39:56
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
prplehippo wrote: Don't you guys think that it's gotten to the point that no matter what GW does people will still complain about it?
I agree with this.
prplehippo wrote: It just seems to me they are "damned if they do, damned if they don't".
I don't agree with this. GWwill attract criticism for anything they do, but it's not because they're being held to unfair standards. It's because of the things they do, and will continue doing (although tbh, by this point in the cost-cutting cycle it seems likely that they no longer have the resources to do the things people want, but... well, the solution to that is to have spent the last ten years being a bit better at their jobs).
'People seem to criticise everything I do!'
'Well, you do kill puppies for fun. Perhaps if you stopped doing that, people wouldn't be so critical?'
'What? No, I'm gonna keep with the puppy thing. But I mean... no matter what I do, people won't stop giving me a hard time about it. It's like I can't win.'
2014/10/18 12:22:45
Subject: A response I had from GW Investor Relations - thought someone might get a kick out of it.
For instance the Knight Titan was a popular model, fits the Imperial aesthetic, has good detail and paints up nicely.
Looked at with a critical eye it is rather expensive at £85 and has very few options of weapons, accessories or poseability. You need the rules, which are another £25, if you want actually to use it in a game.
These are fair, objective criticisms of the model. GW still sold plenty of them, I believe.
I'll just step in and say that half of that reply made me feel really good, and half of it did not. 40k has, for me at least, always been about having fun with my friends. Play loose with the rules, chat while you play, convert and paint your models to make them look awesome (by our standards anyway. there are much better people out there) and compliment each other on them, read the fluff and talk about that. I really like that. It's, well, fun. I can actually understand their decision not to hold tournaments because, for them, competitive play isn't the point of the game, so if players want to play that way they are welcome to, but it's not "officially supported". It would be like if Privateer Press had a "global campaign" for Warmachine. That's not the direction they have chosen to take with the product. Warmachine is mainly focused on competitive tournament style play. If people want to play campaigns or custom game formats they can but it's not something Privateer Press spends a lot of effort on.
The part about no communication though I do not like. However, again I can understand it because of how incredibly toxic a lot of the 40k community has gotten. I think it has kind of turned into a vicious feedback cycle where people are angry at GW because they don't have any communication (and other reasons, many of which are probably justified, and some of which probably aren't) but by this point if GW does open official communications, especially over the internet because our own OT forum can show you how that gets, we'd get so much stored up vitriol dumped out that it wouldn't do much good and GW would probably decide to close them down again. It's kind of sad really.
Like watching other people play video games (badly) while blathering about nothing in particular? Check out my Youtube channel: joemamaUSA!
BrianDavion wrote: Between the two of us... I think GW is assuming we the players are not complete idiots.
Rapidly on path to becoming the world's youngest bitter old man.
5000
Who knows? 
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress 
3rd Company (3000 points) 
