What a shame with the catalogue of imagery they own. It could even be a fun place to drop new images for us to obsess about potential new minis hidden in the background.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So the Lore video was a talking head for most of it?
Pretty much
Which is ok, if painting or going to sleep. However, was very short, not really much depth and not long enough to do either (paint or go to sleep), so no good. Moreover, I can't watch it, the few pictures they do put in, instantly cut back to his head (there are some pictures behind his head but... ).
Question for anyone with the W+ substriction: Does everything (or anything at all) has Subtitles / Captions in some kind?
I'm severely hearing impaired and relying on such things when watching something, knowing that GW tends to ignore accessibility in their videos, it would be interesting if they try better with paid content.
Could have hired Darren Latham for a painting vid, plus Luetin or oculus or whoever for a lore vid, plus 3 random nobodies for a batrep, plus 12 BTS people for the work, all for a grand or two. But apparently they actually couldn't. SeemsGood.
rocksville wrote: Question for anyone with the W+ substriction: Does everything (or anything at all) has Subtitles / Captions in some kind?
I'm severely hearing impaired and relying on such things when watching something, knowing that GW tends to ignore accessibility in their videos, it would be interesting if they try better with paid content.
After having a quick look at some of the shows:
Angels of Death: yes
Hammer and Bolter: yes
Masterclass: no
Loremasters: no
Battle Report: no
Subtitles in English, German, and Spanish (although i only tested English)
Also as a note, when selecting language the selection screen gives no hint you have selected anything, but when you close the screen the subtitles are on
I don't really see how to make lore videos without having a monologue, to be honest. If it's not a stream, obviously.
Loremaster's first video was good, I have nothing to say against Wade. It wasn't a "talking head", though. Lots of official artwork shown to illustrate some key events in Abaddon's life. Which is also the way some youtuber channels do it.
It's just a story I already know, but for newcomers, it's nice to have that character presented that way.
About the future topics for the Loremaster's series, I fully expect they'll be talking about main figures / factions the same way.
It's just AoS content is lacking so far (just one battle report using the Dominion miniatures), and I'll be honest I'm more leaning towards fantasy content these days rather than 40k.
That is what HMBC is saying, sure they could pay Luetin09 to read it, possibly even research and do all the behind the scenes stuff, but as shown with the animators, they would request he remove his channel.
And that is the part that would make it a no-go for any of the people with decent followings on YouTube. And anyone who doesn't have a decent following on YouTube, why would you be hiring them in that case?
Yeah that's true but I'm not saying they should pay Luetin to do it. I'm saying Luetin has done it, and this means that they can do it too, given that he was just one nerd with a passion, and they're a hundredmillion corporation charging thousands of nerds a monthly tithe for lore. They should be able to do it ten times over, but from the looks of it, they apparently can't.
It's a bit of a flawed argument because GW have shareholders to answer to, yes they could have big budgets but they can't just throw money away on stuff in the manner you're implying, they'd have to answer to shareholders. Youtubers don't, if they're passionate there's nothing stopping them pouring hundreds or thousands of manhours into one video.
I thought the Loremasters video was a bit of a waste of time but I think I'm probably not really the target audience, more geared at new people who might not have heard the story a dozen times already.
I'm not saying they have to funnel big dollars into this (though technically they should, if that's what the masses are paying for). I'm saying that some dudes can apparently to it (and do it very well), almost for free, or near enough, when compared to whatever GW are raking in on a daily basis (ie millions of pounds. Literally several dozens of millions per month, next to which, paying some guy $1k per month is a literal pittance).
JWBS wrote: I'm not saying they have to funnel big dollars into this (though technically they should, if that's what the masses are paying for). I'm saying that some dudes can apparently to it (and do it very well), almost for free, or near enough, when compared to whatever GW are raking in on a daily basis (ie millions of pounds. Literally several dozens of millions per month, next to which, paying some guy $1k per month is a literal pittance).
Well let's say they get 100k subscriber. That's 500,000£. Enough to pay for couple episodes of angels of death per month.
How many subscribers you btw expect W+ get? Since you say millions of pounds guess you are expecting several hundred thousand per month as a bare minimum.
And people can do it for free WHEN THEY AREN'T LOOKING FOR PROFIT.
Funny that. You can pay freely when you don't have to worry is it profitable or not. (also helps if you copy images and text from original source)
Nothing btw is free. That youtuber is paying for it in the end and if his income from product doesn't cover it he pays it from his own pocket. Individual fans can do that out of passion. Company that has obligation to do profit can't just do it for fun of it even if it means they are paying themselves from it.
rocksville wrote: Question for anyone with the W+ substriction: Does everything (or anything at all) has Subtitles / Captions in some kind?
I'm severely hearing impaired and relying on such things when watching something, knowing that GW tends to ignore accessibility in their videos, it would be interesting if they try better with paid content.
After having a quick look at some of the shows:
Angels of Death: yes
Hammer and Bolter: yes
Masterclass: no
Loremasters: no
Battle Report: no
Subtitles in English, German, and Spanish (although i only tested English)
Also as a note, when selecting language the selection screen gives no hint you have selected anything, but when you close the screen the subtitles are on
If that's true that's genuinely shocking and, possibly, illegal. The UK has pretty strict accessibility legislation now and captioned/subtitled videos are a requirement. There are some types of content that don't need it, but the above wouldn't fall into that category, and there are some exceptions for other reasons, which likely wouldn't apply. It's especially weird that the lore video doesn't have it. Surely they're working from a script for that?
GW are looking for profit. And one guy (looking for profit), can do it better. Without the corporate megalith backing him. You're taking me far too literally here. I'm saying that some guy in a semi-detached in Ipswich, working for free (to start), then for YT ad revenue or Patreon or W/E, is doing it better. Compared to GW industries. Compared to GW corp. Compared to GW conglomerate. Doing it better, With his Blue Yeti mic and his GW sourcebooks. Doing it better. Why are you defending GW doing it worse? I thought you were a GW detractor.
/Edit - Luetin is doing it for 400 Patrons (ie maybe £1K per month), plus YT ad revenue.
JWBS wrote: Could have hired Darren Latham for a painting vid, plus Luetin or oculus or whoever for a lore vid, plus 3 random nobodies for a batrep, plus 12 BTS people for the work, all for a grand or two. But apparently they actually couldn't. SeemsGood.
Hire 17 people, for 1-4 days work each, for £2,000, right...
JWBS wrote: GW are looking for profit. And one guy (looking for profit), can do it better. Without the corporate megalith backing him. You're taking me far too literally here. I'm saying that some guy in a semi-detached in Ipswich, working for free (to start), then for YT ad revenue or Patreon or W/E, is doing it better. Compared to GW industries. Compared to GW corp. Compared to GW conglomerate. Doing it better, With his Blue Yeti mic and his GW sourcebooks. Doing it better. Why are you defending GW doing it worse? I thought you were a GW detractor.
/Edit - Luetin is doing it for 400 Patrons (ie maybe £1K per month), plus YT ad revenue.
bEcAuSe gW HaS tO mAke A PrOfIt gUiSe!
Though I suspect that is GW's attitude. Instead of going all in, subsidizing the service till it can gain traction, they gave it bare minimum budget to get it's thing done and now it'll sink or swim based on that because to the GW exec that came up with it, streaming/subscription services are just a way to part money from the guillible, nothing more.
12 editors is obviously very generous. I'm saying it's peanuts in the grand scheme. You don't have to take that (or the $ sum) as a hard number, dotdotdot
Automatically Appended Next Post: PEOpLE thAT WRiTE LiKE THIs sHOUd noT be ALlOwEd to JoIN tHe CoNVErSATiOn.
H.B.M.C. wrote: So the Lore video was a talking head for most of it?
Pretty much
Which is ok, if painting or going to sleep. However, was very short, not really much depth and not long enough to do either (paint or go to sleep), so no good. Moreover, I can't watch it, the few pictures they do put in, instantly cut back to his head (there are some pictures behind his head but... ).
Ironically, and in my opinion, alfabusa set up the golden standard for the lore videos with the pilot one.
It has back and forths, it covers the evolution across multiple books and tries to adress any potential issues or holes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JWBS wrote: GW are looking for profit. And one guy (looking for profit), can do it better. Without the corporate megalith backing him. You're taking me far too literally here. I'm saying that some guy in a semi-detached in Ipswich, working for free (to start), then for YT ad revenue or Patreon or W/E, is doing it better. Compared to GW industries. Compared to GW corp. Compared to GW conglomerate. Doing it better, With his Blue Yeti mic and his GW sourcebooks. Doing it better. Why are you defending GW doing it worse? I thought you were a GW detractor.
/Edit - Luetin is doing it for 400 Patrons (ie maybe £1K per month), plus YT ad revenue.
Yeah. going by socialblade, Luetin's operating budget is about 2.5k pounds per month... so he has about 500-1000 pounds to dedicate to this whole affair. It only makes the comparison worse.
The big problem GW faces with lore content is that fans will do a better job, for free. Most podcasters do their thing with the understanding that it is purely labour of love and their energy/passion drives their production.
It is difficult for a business to compete with that energy, and it also has a deflationary effect on pricing. Why would I ever listen to GW's lore videos when there are already 10,000 hours of GW lore done by others that is freely available?
Gregor Samsa wrote: The big problem GW faces with lore content is that fans will do a better job, for free. Most podcasters do their thing with the understanding that it is purely labour of love and their energy/passion drives their production.
It is difficult for a business to compete with that energy, and it also has a deflationary effect on pricing. Why would I ever listen to GW's lore videos when there are already 10,000 hours of GW lore done by others that is freely available?
Because not all fan lore readings are accurate? Or include non-canon sources.
Again, there is currently a whole one episode of Loremasters. You want it crunchier and more in-depth? Tell GW as well as telling us. They’re the ones in the position to change up their offerings.
Gregor Samsa wrote: The big problem GW faces with lore content is that fans will do a better job, for free. Most podcasters do their thing with the understanding that it is purely labour of love and their energy/passion drives their production.
It is difficult for a business to compete with that energy, and it also has a deflationary effect on pricing. Why would I ever listen to GW's lore videos when there are already 10,000 hours of GW lore done by others that is freely available?
Many times its also not really about quality so much as it is about style.
Get together 5 different people and give them the same information and they can present the same information in 5 totally different ways. It might well be that of those 5 different ways no single one is the "best". However each one might resonate and work "best" for a different segment of the viewing population. This is part of why Youtube channels can "deliver higher quality" because in part its not a higher quality. What it is is a style that they've refined and practiced and built a fanbase around. That fanbase likes that style of presentation over others so they will view that style as "superior" even if it, fundamentally, isn't.
Heck some can be really popular, but actually be really bad sources of information. Being inaccurate, highly opinionated, etc... But still be popular!
And yes we have to remember that sometimes fans can be better. Sometimes they've more passion than a staffer working 9-5; sometimes fans (even if they are earning) can put in more hours because they are self employed; or out of work (other than their channel) and have nothing else to focus upon. Sometimes they have better equipment because they chose to invest more into it. Sometimes they are just more skilled at something than someone employed to do something.
We have this concept as we grow up that's fostered upon us which is that professionals are professional and skilled; when in reality they are simply people who get paid to do a job. Some will be highly skilled, some will know just enough to get by and some are totally underskilled and only get away with it through internal company politics
Gregor Samsa wrote: The big problem GW faces with lore content is that fans will do a better job, for free. Most podcasters do their thing with the understanding that it is purely labour of love and their energy/passion drives their production.
It is difficult for a business to compete with that energy, and it also has a deflationary effect on pricing. Why would I ever listen to GW's lore videos when there are already 10,000 hours of GW lore done by others that is freely available?
Because not all fan lore readings are accurate? Or include non-canon sources.
Again, there is currently a whole one episode of Loremasters. You want it crunchier and more in-depth? Tell GW as well as telling us. They’re the ones in the position to change up their offerings.
I figure they'll do it in a rough order. Starting with more simple ice-breaker lore videos designed to flesh out the basics of the setting and characters. Once they bring fans ot the same rough point, then we'll potentially see things get deeper and deeper. With a basic foundation they'll be able to say "tune into loremasters this week for an in depth look at Tyranids! If you're new to Tyranids check out the other 5 videos we've already got on them to get up up to speed on their lore before we delve into their mysterious origins!"
I also wager we could see them pair latter lore videos to new releases. "Getting the new Eldar boxed set this coming week? Check out the loremasters video that goes into detail telling you all about these new Exodite models and the history of their craftworlds located on the far rims of the Galaxy" Along with articles in White Dwarf and Warhammer Community and the codex, of course.
One competitive advantage GW could do with lore would be to interview codex writers/designers to get an "inside look" at the ideas and themes that go into a history of how a faction/race came about. GW has access to those people more so than the average fan does. So that could be an edge there.
If lore videos are going to be "pure canon" then another option would be to seriously put black library to work. Perhaps a weekly "mystery theatre" type radio program (like the old days?) that is a narrated, ongoing story. However - that's expensive.
And again that relates to pricing. Paying a team of people to script and produce shows costs them $. But I can tune into Vince Vs warhammer wednesday or Tabletop Minions Sunday show and get the same level of "expert" analysis.
Those shows may not be as directly "lore focused" as what GW is offering. But both channels are certainly experts on tabletop wargaming and the various backgrounds and "lore" of the entire hobby ecosystem.
Those are serious rivals to the product GW offers and GW will have to make serious capital investments to earn its place amongst a fairly crowded field of online content creators that are publishing top-notch stuff already.
The Loremasters episode has a competent and engaging presenter, pretty pictures to go with the narration, good technical production, and presents the highlights of Abaddons career in chronological order. Seems fine to me.
Gregor Samsa wrote: One competitive advantage GW could do with lore would be to interview codex writers/designers to get an "inside look" at the ideas and themes that go into a history of how a faction/race came about. GW has access to those people more so than the average fan does. So that could be an edge there.
I'd rather see making of and behind the scenes videos as a separate series. GW should definitely do them, but I think it's better to have them separated so if you're only looking for the fictional part, you don't have to put the time into going through the real world stuff (and vice versa).
GoldenHorde wrote: The apologetics are getting pathetic for the "Best Warhammer content ever".
Subpar content. Botched launch. Poor value.
Do you people go to a bakery and accept half baked bread?
If I keep eating half baked bread at full price ....it might be fully baked one day!
Well clearly the bakery still needs to unlock some things on the tech tree, you know you can't just learn from other's experience. Every baker has to learn how to domesticate grass first!
GoldenHorde wrote: The apologetics are getting pathetic for the "Best Warhammer content ever".
Subpar content. Botched launch. Poor value.
Do you people go to a bakery and accept half baked bread?
If I keep eating half baked bread at full price ....it might be fully baked one day!
I appreciate that the content might not be what you're after.
But personally I enjoy the content and as far as value goes, I'm extremely fortunate to be in a position where I won't even notice £5 going out per month. The value is what you expect in return for what you pay.
And I'm sure if they had just 1:1 copied other presented styles, not a one of you would be here posting about them "just copying <insert youtuber name here>!", right?
Learning from others' experiences is great...except when you're actively trying to do your own thing.
rocksville wrote: Question for anyone with the W+ substriction: Does everything (or anything at all) has Subtitles / Captions in some kind?
I'm severely hearing impaired and relying on such things when watching something, knowing that GW tends to ignore accessibility in their videos, it would be interesting if they try better with paid content.
After having a quick look at some of the shows:
Angels of Death: yes
Hammer and Bolter: yes
Masterclass: no
Loremasters: no
Battle Report: no
Subtitles in English, German, and Spanish (although i only tested English)
Also as a note, when selecting language the selection screen gives no hint you have selected anything, but when you close the screen the subtitles are on
Thank you, just as disappointing as I thought. Settles it for me, I won't even test it in that case.
Kanluwen wrote: And I'm sure if they had just 1:1 copied other presented styles, not a one of you would be here posting about them "just copying <insert youtuber name here>!", right?
Probably not, since nobody here is saying GW should make a literal 1:1 copy of anything.
Learning from others' experiences is great...except when you're actively trying to do your own thing.
Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
The point people are getting at is that GW should be able to make stuff that is at least on par with what fan creators do on a shoestring budget.
That's always been a problem with moving from fan creations to corporate creations though. Someone with passion and talent can often outdo someone who is just doing something for a paycheck, budget or no.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
Gw didn't have to make a propietary server, either.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
No one FORCED gw to release a platform with 20 scans of white dwarf, five lore segments from preexisting books, three animations and two live videos in each category and ask for money for that.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
No one FORCED gw to release a platform with 20 scans of white dwarf, five lore segments from preexisting books, three animations and two live videos in each category and ask for money for that.
You say that, but I find the thought amusing that Warhammer+ came into being because a desperate accountant high on the latest designer drugs held the board at gunpoint with a conspicuously toy-like weapon while reading a list of perfectly reasonable demands.
phandaal wrote: The point people are getting at is that GW should be able to make stuff that is at least on par with what fan creators do on a shoestring budget.
It's week 3 of WH+ and there's more content on it than any single creator has done in the same timeframe with multiple different options on offer. One Loremasters a week might be bad but add on animation episodes and vault content and it's not so sparse. MWG might put out 5/6 BatReps a week but it has a fairly large team + guests and IIRC at least 4 recording studios compared to GW's one team with no guests and a single studio.
Honestly, everyone needs to stop comparing a 3-week old service with no real experience in the field to groups/people who have been doing this for years.
That's always been a problem with moving from fan creations to corporate creations though. Someone with passion and talent can often outdo someone who is just doing something for a paycheck, budget or no.
Which to me implies that the people who work at GW, and the WarCom team especially, don't actually care about the hobby which is a ludicrous statement to make.
Cronch wrote: No one FORCED gw to release a platform with 20 scans of white dwarf, five lore segments from preexisting books, three animations and two live videos in each category and ask for money for that.
Please tell me which other platforms GW should use to host its shows. YouTube is worthless for them because the money comes from ad revenue which GW is flat out not going to have on its videos for very obvious reasons, not to mention the awful copyright system. Amazon Prime is a paid service that GW will see naff all money from, same with any other paid streaming service.
GW could, oh, wait till it has a library of contents built up to start asking money for it?
Or not do it at all, they don't have to dime you for homeopathic amounts of content. They want to, and clearly it's working since people are defending paying money for content you could binge while your nana is at the bingo night.
As for not comparing GW, multi-million company with it's latest project to a MWG...why? It's not some plucky startup in a garage, it's a corporation. Why should I cut slack for a corporate project?
Cronch wrote: GW could, oh, wait till it has a library of contents built up to start asking money for it?
Or not do it at all, they don't have to dime you for homeopathic amounts of content. They want to, and clearly it's working since people are defending paying money for content you could binge while your nana is at the bingo night.
I do agree it would have been nice to see more content but you didn't answer my question, what platform do you think GW should be using if not its own?
As for not comparing GW, multi-million company with it's latest project to a MWG...why? It's not some plucky startup in a garage, it's a corporation. Why should I cut slack for a corporate project?
The company might not be but this project basically is. It doesn't matter if GW has a £200M revenue because that's not going into WH+ is it? Anyone with an ounce of project management experience will tell you that pumping loads of resources into a brand new project isn't a good idea and again, people should be waiting more than 3 weeks before tolling the bell on WH+.
I might be in minority here, but with the amount of content on all other platforms, combined with my available viewing time, this gradual release suits me just fine. As long as it is continuous.
The issue is the current state of people's expectations with online content now...they want it all, in one go, right now. Binge is the only way to watch content apparently. Personally, I don't like it, I don't need to be at the destination immediately, I'll enjoy the journey
That's always been a problem with moving from fan creations to corporate creations though. Someone with passion and talent can often outdo someone who is just doing something for a paycheck, budget or no.
Which to me implies that the people who work at GW, and the WarCom team especially, don't actually care about the hobby which is a ludicrous statement to make.
That sure would be a ludicrous statement to make, yes. Funny enough, the statement I did make was intended to give GW the benefit of the doubt but you're too amped-up on the defense for GW to see that.
I would say that SOME people at GW don't care about the hobby as much as they care about getting paid for doing a job at a company that happens to sell miniatures. You run into that in every company. It's one of the reasons why companies often enlist their fans to help bring some of that passion back to their products.
Edit:
Honestly, everyone needs to stop comparing a 3-week old service with no real experience in the field to groups/people who have been doing this for years.
Unfortunately, that's not how things work on Planet Earth.
Cronch wrote: GW could, oh, wait till it has a library of contents built up to start asking money for it?
Or not do it at all, they don't have to dime you for homeopathic amounts of content. They want to, and clearly it's working since people are defending paying money for content you could binge while your nana is at the bingo night.
I do agree it would have been nice to see more content but you didn't answer my question, what platform do you think GW should be using if not its own?
As for not comparing GW, multi-million company with it's latest project to a MWG...why? It's not some plucky startup in a garage, it's a corporation. Why should I cut slack for a corporate project?
The company might not be but this project basically is. It doesn't matter if GW has a £200M revenue because that's not going into WH+ is it? Anyone with an ounce of project management experience will tell you that pumping loads of resources into a brand new project isn't a good idea and again, people should be waiting more than 3 weeks before tolling the bell on WH+.
Any multi-million company that decides to try and compete with their own fanbase at doing things and then fails to even produce content on the same level with a budget several thousand times bigger deserves to be laughed at.
Cronch wrote: GW could, oh, wait till it has a library of contents built up to start asking money for it?
Or not do it at all, they don't have to dime you for homeopathic amounts of content. They want to, and clearly it's working since people are defending paying money for content you could binge while your nana is at the bingo night.
I do agree it would have been nice to see more content but you didn't answer my question, what platform do you think GW should be using if not its own?
As for not comparing GW, multi-million company with it's latest project to a MWG...why? It's not some plucky startup in a garage, it's a corporation. Why should I cut slack for a corporate project?
The company might not be but this project basically is. It doesn't matter if GW has a £200M revenue because that's not going into WH+ is it? Anyone with an ounce of project management experience will tell you that pumping loads of resources into a brand new project isn't a good idea and again, people should be waiting more than 3 weeks before tolling the bell on WH+.
Any multi-million company that decides to try and compete with their own fanbase at doing things and then fails to even produce content on the same level with a budget several thousand times bigger deserves to be laughed at.
You're lumping every piece of content that gets produced together and saying it's done by 'the fanbase' which makes the claim of a budget 'several thousand times bigger' even more outrageously stupid than it looks like on face value. Add that to lumping every Warhammer+ project together, as if they all get the same uniform resource allotment completely destroys whatever validity your point my have had.
Some projects like the one by the guy people like you ran out of 40k by sending constant death threats might have had ridiculous shoestring budgets compared to the Warhammer Animations team, but pretending like GW's battlereport team has 'a thousand times bigger budget' than MWG or TTT or TTT or and of the other big wargaming channels is stupid. Those are all reasonably sized companies/organizations in their own rights. MWG hasn't been 2 guys in their basement making wargaming videos for like a decade.
MWG has been doing what they've been doing for years. Love them or hate them they're THE pioneers in the field of video battle reports. They've spent untold amounts of money on sets, editing, cameras, workflow optimization, hosting, etc, etc, etc before you even get to them buying most of their models retail, contracting out a lot of the painting and terrain, and having their full time staff equally as involved in the hobby side of the work as the actual presentation (for the most part). They've poured effort, time, money, and expertise into their work that GW couldn't possibly match, even with an unlimited budget. Money can't buy time.
Meanwhile GW is using people they already have on staff for other stuff, using their own armies or already existing studio armies on already existing studio terrain, putting everything out on an already existing distribution platform. On the margin I would bet MWG actually has 'a thousand times bigger budget' than GW's batrep people do.
At that point it comes down to what the intent of the content is. If they intend to leverage their size to push their content into fully replace existing high quality community content, the way they've done with the animations, they can feth off, obviously. If they intend for their content to be something that can carve out it's own niche through quality presentation, then more power too them. Competition is good for the market place.
Cronch wrote: GW could, oh, wait till it has a library of contents built up to start asking money for it?
Or not do it at all, they don't have to dime you for homeopathic amounts of content. They want to, and clearly it's working since people are defending paying money for content you could binge while your nana is at the bingo night.
I do agree it would have been nice to see more content but you didn't answer my question, what platform do you think GW should be using if not its own?
As for not comparing GW, multi-million company with it's latest project to a MWG...why? It's not some plucky startup in a garage, it's a corporation. Why should I cut slack for a corporate project?
The company might not be but this project basically is. It doesn't matter if GW has a £200M revenue because that's not going into WH+ is it? Anyone with an ounce of project management experience will tell you that pumping loads of resources into a brand new project isn't a good idea and again, people should be waiting more than 3 weeks before tolling the bell on WH+.
1) I do not oppose GW putting it's own things on it's own platform, charging money for it. I oppose to charging full price sub fee for what's basically no content at all. You're paying now for maybe future content you will still have to pay for when it comes cause it's a sub.
In the meantime, this stuff could go on netflix or amazon, but honestly, it belongs on Youtube in my opinion.
2)I, as a customer, do not give two bits about GW profits. I care about what kind of product I get for my money, and I will compare the product on sale to other available products. Right now, it's not coming up favorably against those products like MWG given the price. I will compare it with other products (entertainment) in the same categories because that's what they ask my money for. If this was free stuff, I'd be willing to cut the creators slack. But it's not free, is it? I am told this is stuff worth paying for, and I don't know why when similar products are available for free, at similar or higher quality.
After all, GW is not gonna give me a discount because I'm earning in eastern european potatomoney, is it, why should I give them any discount in how i treat their corporate project?
Why not compare W+’s first entry to Luetin’s earliest vids?.
Is Luetina multi million company that set up a propietary streaming service?
No. Means also he doesn't have to worry about being profitable or paying 5 digits per episode of animation.
Those episodes in no way cost in the 5 digits. They wouldn't look so bad if they did.
A two-person crew filming a two-hour-long Q&A from fixed positions and adding a title card to the beginning costs ~$3K in the Boston area. There's no way story art, animation, and voice actors for an original production are coming in for under $10,000, never mind the cost of the team product managing it on the GW side.
ERJAK wrote: [ They've poured effort, time, money, and expertise into their work that GW couldn't possibly match, even with an unlimited budget. Money can't buy time.
Say what? Money can and will buy expertise! Thats the point? An expert has spent his own time becoming an expert thats why they cost serious money.
GW may choose not to spend money on that but they could match and surpass, by a long mile, YouTube videos quality.
StraightSilver wrote: General consensus is that the cheapest animation studios cost around $3000 a minute.
If that's true, each episode of Hammer and Bolter costs in the region of $50-60k.
So if that is true then Hammer and Bolter in its entirety has cost GW around half a million.
That's why it's not Hollywood quality.
Lol, now that is some fine bullpucky.
On average, an anime season of13 23 minutes-long episodes costs 2million dollars. Of these, the following are spent thusly:
A) about 350.000 are destined to the intro and outro songs and coverage of royalties. Old bale eye did not use either.
B)between 800.000 and a million will cover the voice actors. Japanese voice actors are basically celebrities and they must do multiple recordings. By contrast, western voice actors hover between the middle to the middle-low class, they do not get that much.Old bale eye used E-list actors that, bar the narrator, had notoriously short roles. Thus they most likely needed 1, maaaybe 2 recordings.
That leaves the animation budget at 700k to 1000k dollars for 300 minutes. On average. That is not the lowest, which is clearly what gw did go for.
I obviously do not expect hollywood quality, but I sure did not expect a corporate product would look sl gakky next to helluva boss
Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
I think my biggest concern the moment I heard this announced was "they're not going to have enough content to support this, and it's going to half-ass low quality stuff like all the 40K shovelware games". I think saying it only costs 6 bucks a month is.... wrongheaded. Sure, objectively $6 is not a lot of money - basically a pumpkin spice latte, who cares, right?
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
Considering how most companies with far more toxic fanbases manage to credit their workers...
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
So the reasoning behind GW not crediting their artists is to protect them?
BertBert wrote: So the reasoning behind GW not crediting their artists is to protect them?
It's very likely. Pre-people sending death threats to Ward, each Codex/Army Book had a credited writer so people would know who "ruined" their background or "broke" the army. Matt Ward did stuff that people didn't like, people's reactions were well beyond the realm of reason and GW then stopped crediting the designers. Considering the fanbase is still horrendously toxic I would expect the same policy would be applied to any WH+ stuff. It's not some evil attempt to reduce people's efforts to just "The Corporation".
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
Considering how most companies with far more toxic fanbases manage to credit their workers...
Oh yeah. Banri oda from ffxiv and madeline roux from wow got massive amounts of bile and death threats. They are still credited as, to quote director Naoki Yoshida, "they deserve their
Due credit."
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Lord Damocles wrote: And yet they credit authors, White Dwarf contributors, games designers, etc...
I haven't seen any game designers credited for anything since, well ever. Unless we're talking about people like Andy Chambers? I didn't even know James Hewitt made Blood Bowl and Titanicus until this year.
Just from the reactions I've seen to WH+ so far, it looks like its the right move after all.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Actually, I mean the fact that people threw tantrums and sent death threats to someone because he wrote some words they didn't like. Where's the accountability for them or the countless people who kept the hatred going for absolutely no reason?
In more recent times we've also seen some of the authors who wrote the children's warhammer books also get similar threats and hostile behaviour before the books had even been released.
Plus if you want something direct, at least 1 3D animator got scared away from Warhammer animation entirely when "fans" discovered that the person might go and work for Warhammer under Warhammer+.
Sadly there are those who consider themselves fans of Warhammer who are unreasonably and abusively hostile not just toward "Games Workshop" in forums or message boards; but who actively seek out specific staff and send them hate mail, death threats and more.
So yes I think if WE as fans want to see GW's attitude toward creators change and to see more credits then its 100% on us to weed out that behaviour and discourage it from happening (no, no that doesn't mean find those people and send them death threats - it means making it clear that that behaviour is not tolerated - ergo likely removing them from social groups and the like etc....)
I would assume GW doesn't want to have someone getting death threats because they don't like the animation quality in Bolter and Chainsword
Plus if you want something direct, at least 1 3D animator got scared away from Warhammer animation entirely when "fans" discovered that the person might go and work for Warhammer under Warhammer+.
That is, sadly, much more due to the virulent cultures that permeate most fandoms in japan and south korea. Even things like a celebrity getting the wrong boyfriend, or even the wrong boyfriend, can cause a massive backlash.
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Sure but also, death threats. GW fans and anti-fans take stuff WAY too seriously. I'm not surprised they decided to get rid of credits when it meant online harassment for the writers because some manchild decided the writer got his precious toy soldiers wrong.
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Yes, because what happened back then was purely constructive critisism towards the author... no wait, the internet warrior community is a steaming pile of gak that sends death threats because they don't like a short piece of fluff.
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Yes, because what happened back then was purely constructive critisism towards the author... no wait, the internet warrior community is a steaming pile of gak that sends death threats because they don't like a short piece of fluff.
When was the last time anyone gave a gak about constructive criticism they got? Or it resulted in any changes?
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Yes, because what happened back then was purely constructive critisism towards the author... no wait, the internet warrior community is a steaming pile of gak that sends death threats because they don't like a short piece of fluff.
When was the last time anyone gave a gak about constructive criticism they got? Or it resulted in any changes?
I can't tell if you're trying at dark humour or honestly trying to somehow defend/validate sending death threats to authors for rules for a toy game/writing a story book for kids/etc....
Gert wrote: Yeah, it'll be very unlikely that GW will put specific credits on this when none are on Codexes and the like. A repeat of the behaviour towards Matt Ward isn't something anyone wants again.
You mean, a repeat of blaming people who did a bad job for doing a bad job?
There exist such concepts as 'responsibility' and 'accountability', most adults should be familiar with.
Yes, because what happened back then was purely constructive critisism towards the author... no wait, the internet warrior community is a steaming pile of gak that sends death threats because they don't like a short piece of fluff.
When was the last time anyone gave a gak about constructive criticism they got? Or it resulted in any changes?
As someone who instructs and teaches in the work place and is heavily involved in coaching and mentoring, I see it most days.
BertBert wrote: So the reasoning behind GW not crediting their artists is to protect them?
It's very likely. Pre-people sending death threats to Ward, each Codex/Army Book had a credited writer so people would know who "ruined" their background or "broke" the army. Matt Ward did stuff that people didn't like, people's reactions were well beyond the realm of reason and GW then stopped crediting the designers. Considering the fanbase is still horrendously toxic I would expect the same policy would be applied to any WH+ stuff. It's not some evil attempt to reduce people's efforts to just "The Corporation".
If it isn't that, why doesn't every company do it?
Gert wrote:Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
A bit of a rant under the spoiler tags about that money thing :/
Spoiler:
But GW has loads of money and money can buy you quite a bit of stuff. They could have paid for more people to create content, be it painting/kitbashing videos, lore, interviews, podcasts, behind the scenes stories about some stuff with funny anecdotes and interesting tidbits of the whole process (without giving away trade secrets of course).
They could do multiple battle reports in parallel, edit them, and then have a buffer of those for when something else isn't ready for whatever reason. They could make a full multimedia version of the old "a tale of four games" White Dwarf series over half a year or so (videos, articles galleries, army lists, that kind of stuff), have narrative campaigns with multiple people where you get comments from each player's perspective as they try to outwit each other without knowing what the others have planned but you the viewer get to know it all and can try to predict how it goes and get invested into the outcome.
Have multiple painter paint the same miniature in different styles (Louise with her colourful style, somebody with a clean cover photo style, a grimdark style, and an absolute beginner style). That would be four different videos and then a fifth of them discussing different approaches to get certain effects and why/how they did certain things. They wouldn't even need to be in the same office to do that that (video conferencing exists, set everybody up in an individual studio, at home or wherever, with a little bit of that money GW has).
Today there are so many options that are relatively affordable (considering their capabilities), within their budget, and deliver enough quality (GW are not making IMAX movies with Christopher Nolan). That's why even small-ish youtubers can make stuff of rather high quality even if they don't invest tens of thousands (sometimes not even thousands) in their camera setup. It's not the late 00s anymore when Red cameras were still a bit temperamental and the brand new offering for the high end prosumer/pro target audience.
They could also just take the existing setup that they already have and parallelism it a bit more so they can output more content if they want to make this channel "a thing". That's something money can buy them. They could have invest a low single digit percentage of their profits (of those 100mil or so of that one year) into this (would still be a few millions but leave them with more than 90 mil in profits, which would by itself still be a huge year over year increase) and also hired editors and/or consultants to help them set up these multiple sets and get a head start on all of this. And the equipment would also be useful into the future. It's not like these cameras turn into dust in the new year. Individuals or small groups manage it on youtube, Darren Latham one of their miniature designers did high quality painting videos for fun in his free time.
And that's just the video side of it. If they made something like a narrative campaign then they could also give away free professional campaign maps and/or little rulesets each month/quarter/whatever that synergise with those campaigns. Get people into that stuff so they start new armies in parallel with those videos. And if they give away free minis occasionally they could have the above mentioned multi painter setup for those too. Give people who just want the mini a reason to watch the videos, give people who watch these videos a mini to paint along.
Do better than "okay I guess that's good enough". They have this whole vertically integrated thing, from lore, through miniatures, to games, and all kinds of stuff in between. There should be something they can do to make their subscription service stand out a bit instead of delivering content that gets a passing grade. Actually invest in it so it feels like there's even more to all of this. There's so much cool stuff they have access to and that they could make that fans simply can't do but might love to see.
In the end it's GW who set up a paid service and that service gets naturally compared to the media juggernauts (Disney, Netflix,…) for breadth of content at a similar price point and with fan created content that's relatively free. Having enough content so that fans who are only interested in a portion of it (and not all) feel satisfied should be the default starting point to aim for, not a long term goal for some point in the future. They don't get to play the "lone creator in the basement who doesn't know how all of this works" card, simply because of the resources they have. Or if they don't have something then it's something they can buy. They can bypass a lot of the pain points that independent youtubers can't and they get measured against a different set of parameters. The reason is they make hundreds of millions and if they want into this market then they will have to invest accordingly.
Is Luetina multi million company that set up a propietary streaming service?
No. Means also he doesn't have to worry about being profitable or paying 5 digits per episode of animation.
Nobody is expecting them to have multiple Pixar level animated short series with weekly or monthly releases but if content of that type is rather sparse (takes long to make and is expensive) then use it as the cherry on top and plump up your regular releases with other content, like the stuff I mention under the first spoiler tag above or something else.
It should start with way more of a "hey, that's really cool" mood and way fewer "I guess I give it a few more months and see".
BertBert wrote: So the reasoning behind GW not crediting their artists is to protect them?
It's very likely. Pre-people sending death threats to Ward, each Codex/Army Book had a credited writer so people would know who "ruined" their background or "broke" the army. Matt Ward did stuff that people didn't like, people's reactions were well beyond the realm of reason and GW then stopped crediting the designers. Considering the fanbase is still horrendously toxic I would expect the same policy would be applied to any WH+ stuff. It's not some evil attempt to reduce people's efforts to just "The Corporation".
If it isn't that, why doesn't every company do it?
GW said they weren't including people's names for that reason, or at least they said that's why they stopped back in the day.
Thing is, you can get death threats for saying you like your toast buttered on the wrong side. People aren't going to change, and it's not unique to just one "community." In any large group you're guaranteed to have some unhinged weirdos.
So either accept that it will happen and give people public credit for their work, or never include people's names on anything again. GW seems to have taken the latter approach.
Lord Damocles wrote: And yet they credit authors, White Dwarf contributors, games designers, etc...
I haven't seen any game designers credited for anything since, well ever. Unless we're talking about people like Andy Chambers? I didn't even know James Hewitt made Blood Bowl and Titanicus until this year.
There have been regular articles in White Dwarf by the designers spouting absolute gibberish.
Ouze wrote: I think my biggest concern the moment I heard this announced was "they're not going to have enough content to support this, and it's going to half-ass low quality stuff like all the 40K shovelware games". I think saying it only costs 6 bucks a month is.... wrongheaded. Sure, objectively $6 is not a lot of money - basically a pumpkin spice latte, who cares, right?
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
I dunno, Mandalorian is cool and all but if I have to watch another commercial for The Bad Batch my eyes might start bleeding. Say what one will about Warhammer + animation... at least it doesn't look like THAT.
Jarms48 wrote: I'm not getting it. I might wait for a year and then by a single month to binge watch everything. That's about it.
And that's totally fair and clearly GW think many will that. Which is why they bundle in things like the models and the vouchers to encourage people to remain subscribed. Of course if you don't want either of those things then the service has much less value.
Alongside it you've also got app-access which is a good boon and, again, if you use it its worth the cost; but if you don't or if you feel the apps aren't any good (the 40K one seems to have some issues); then yep its got less value.
ERJAK wrote: [ They've poured effort, time, money, and expertise into their work that GW couldn't possibly match, even with an unlimited budget. Money can't buy time.
Say what? Money can and will buy expertise! Thats the point? An expert has spent his own time becoming an expert thats why they cost serious money.
GW may choose not to spend money on that but they could match and surpass, by a long mile, YouTube videos quality.
They could, sure. But will they?
I was amused by the war com article on 'loremasters' for focusing on how the talking head has been with the studio (in an undisclosed role) for about 12 years, and he talks to the writers sometimes. That's it.
Presumably he has some sort of camera presence (haven't ever seen him speak, myself), but the article definitely took no pains to set him up as an actual warhammer lore expert.
I tried to wait to binge the Angels of Death thing, but I got impatient.
I think my biggest problem with Angels of Death is that there seems to be a good deal of no dialogue in alot of shots where its just a face/helmet. The Helsreach movie, obviously built from ADB’s great novel, had Grimaldus giving his inner thoughts throughout. I think this product would’ve been better served with the same sort of treatment from the main Blood Angel(The Deatwatch guy) and the female ship captain.
I also really like the blood droplets becoming Drop-pods opening sequence.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I think it's weird that the drop pods didn't make any attempt to slow down. They didn't fire their retros and just slammed into the ground.
Even the drop pods get +1 to wound the turn they charge.
Gert wrote: Luetin or any other YT Channel didn't have to make a service in the first place, nor are they restricted in what they can do by either employment laws or Covid restrictions.
WH+ might not be brilliant but you can't just say "but GW has loads of money" as justification for your arguments.
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
That is not an apples to apples comparison, Disney+ is a mainstream service with millions of subscribers, Warhammer+ is a niche market that is never going to have anything like that number of subscribers. Producing content at a particular level is going to cost the same regardless of whether you have 10 subscribers or 10 million and the costs of hosting etc. for having the extra subscribers is going to be be pretty minimal in comparison, so WH+ is never going to have the same sort of money to spend on content.
Also, the vast majority of the content on Disney+ was (and still is) existing content that Disney already owned, as they've been working in that field for far longer than GW have even existed (and have bought everyone else in that field as well!). How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else? Even now the amount of original Disney+ content is dwarfed by the back catalogue stuff.
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
That is not an apples to apples comparison, Disney+ is a mainstream service with millions of subscribers, Warhammer+ is a niche market that is never going to have anything like that number of subscribers. Producing content at a particular level is going to cost the same regardless of whether you have 10 subscribers or 10 million and the costs of hosting etc. for having the extra subscribers is going to be be pretty minimal in comparison, so WH+ is never going to have the same sort of money to spend on content.
Also, the vast majority of the content on Disney+ was (and still is) existing content that Disney already owned, as they've been working in that field for far longer than GW have even existed (and have bought everyone else in that field as well!). How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else? Even now the amount of original Disney+ content is dwarfed by the back catalogue stuff.
Who cares.
GW said "best warhammer content ever".
It could not even deliver something for AOS
How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else?
In addition to the mandalorian (which averaged 40 minutes per episode) they did
a) a mockumentary (about 35 minutes per episode)
b) 6 series of shorts (about 8 minutes per episode, on average, per 6)
c) about 4 docuseries (one with 60 minutes per episode, 3 of 25 minutes per episode, on average)
d) a reality show (60 minutes per episode.)
So, during the first month of disney+, the original content ascended to:
Or, in total: 160+140+192+540+240 = 1272 minutes of material or, in other words, 21 hours of newly made material... which must be combined with the gargantuan back catalogue they had.
Warhammer+? By the end of the month we will have 4 hours of content. Period. It doesn't compare. Specially once one realizes disney+ has been ramping up its original material: 6 dramas and 6 comedies, 5 animations and much, much more are coming to disney+. The growth is exponential, something we don't know warhammer+ will do.
But I have to say this is the most disingenous argument I've ever seen. The fact that whether the series/films available are new to the platform are of no relevance. What matters is that they are available for the paying customers. Why is this such a hard to grasp concept? I haven't seen mary poppins in my life. I don't care if it's not original to disney+, i will be able to easily watch it thanks to the platform.
Again, no one was forcing gw to try and play the streaming service game. If they had made an arrangement with either of the big three services, everything would have been fine, and people would have been spared the drama.
EDIT: oh wait, i forgot most disney+ series release most of their chapters in one go, so the comparison is even more dire for gw.
There's a service, you can get it or not. You feel it's worth it or not.
Hardly like the world is ending.
I am more referring to the debacle with SODAZ and the issue with midwinter. I personally don't care that much about the service, because i find it's pretty bad. But it bothers masively how people are making so many gymnastics to consider it unironically good XD
How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else?
In addition to the mandalorian (which averaged 40 minutes per episode) they did
a) a mockumentary (about 35 minutes per episode)
b) 6 series of shorts (about 8 minutes per episode, on average, per 6)
c) about 4 docuseries (one with 60 minutes per episode, 3 of 25 minutes per episode, on average)
d) a reality show (60 minutes per episode.)
So, during the first month of disney+, the original content ascended to:
Or, in total: 160+140+192+540+240 = 1272 minutes of material or, in other words, 21 hours of newly made material... which must be combined with the gargantuan back catalogue they had.
Warhammer+? By the end of the month we will have 4 hours of content. Period. It doesn't compare. Specially once one realizes disney+ has been ramping up its original material: 6 dramas and 6 comedies, 5 animations and much, much more are coming to disney+. The growth is exponential, something we don't know warhammer+ will do.
But I have to say this is the most disingenous argument I've ever seen. The fact that whether the series/films available are new to the platform are of no relevance. What matters is that they are available for the paying customers. Why is this such a hard to grasp concept? I haven't seen mary poppins in my life. I don't care if it's not original to disney+, i will be able to easily watch it thanks to the platform.
Again, no one was forcing gw to try and play the streaming service game. If they had made an arrangement with either of the big three services, everything would have been fine, and people would have been spared the drama.
EDIT: oh wait, i forgot most disney+ series release most of their chapters in one go, so the comparison is even more dire for gw.
I don't have Disney+ or WH+, just want to add a different viewpoint:
The raw amount of content might not be as big of a factor as it is discussed here. You could give me 1€/month access to every video, book, novel, audio drama and video game ever made that features "fishing" as the main topic and it wouldn't be worth it for me, as I simply have no interest in it.
It doesn't matter if what you offer is objectively a really good offer, when the person you want to sell it doesn't want it.
I think the "competitors" we should compare WH+ to is the free and paid content already available on Youtube and other sources. At the moment the amount of Warhammer content is definitely lacking, quantity wise. At the same time it is not much money per month, either.
People can decide for themselves, wether the cost to content ratio is alright for them. I think if you are only interested in specific parts like only Battle Reports, you won't miss out if you don't subscribe and keep watching Youtube stuff.
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
That is not an apples to apples comparison, Disney+ is a mainstream service with millions of subscribers, Warhammer+ is a niche market that is never going to have anything like that number of subscribers.
So what? The price points are fairly similar so it seems reasonable to compare and the comparison doesn't look good for WH+.
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
That is not an apples to apples comparison, Disney+ is a mainstream service with millions of subscribers, Warhammer+ is a niche market that is never going to have anything like that number of subscribers.
So what? The price points are fairly similar so it seems reasonable to compare and the comparison doesn't look good for WH+.
Does disney+ offer miniature? Voucher? App? Vault?
Warhammer+ isn't just streaming service you know. But hey let's be dishonest Nothing beats arqument like dishonest one.
But if you do an apples-to-apples comparison, Disney Plus almost the same price, and gives you uncountable hours of high-end, expertly produced content. It sounds to me like Warhammer Plus is delivering... 40 minutes a week of new content, is that accurate? And you can gobble up the pre-existing stuff they put on there in an afternoon? Please correct me if I am wrong, I surely could be... and I'd like to be. I'd love a good execution in the premise.
That is not an apples to apples comparison, Disney+ is a mainstream service with millions of subscribers, Warhammer+ is a niche market that is never going to have anything like that number of subscribers.
So what? The price points are fairly similar so it seems reasonable to compare and the comparison doesn't look good for WH+.
Does disney+ offer miniature? Voucher? App? Vault?
Warhammer+ isn't just streaming service you know. But hey let's be dishonest Nothing beats arqument like dishonest one.
GW themselves marketed WH+ as a streaming service. Maybe you'd prefer to compare to Prime Video, which also comes with Amazon Prime membership, free Twitch subs, exclusive Prime member deals etc? The principle is the same - the price points are similar enough to compare the two services and WH+ seems woefully short of cntent right now for a similar price, especially if you don't get much value out of the extras.
There's a service, you can get it or not. You feel it's worth it or not.
Hardly like the world is ending.
People commenting about service, you can read those comments or not
Hardly like the world is ending
Dunno mate, got something to do with GW getting it arse backwards.
You underpromise and overdeliver to wow the crowd, not overpromise and underdeliver.
I'm saying people not finding something to their liking is not drama, not saying you can't complain.
I personally find the little over £1 a month fine for what there is. I would like a painting video each week, a battle report each week and I agree with some of the ideas for beefing up Loremasters we've had here - but in general it's cheap and a few weeks old.
Warhammer+ is £4.99 a month or £49.99 or the year.
However, Warhammer+ came with a mini worth £20 and a £10 voucher, so actually £19.99 for the year.
Which works out at £1.67 a month.
Significantly cheaper than Disney+
However, I was previously paying £1.99 for the 40K app per month which means, for me, Warhammer+ is free.
In terms of content, I subscribed to Disney+ for the Mandalorian, MCU and Star.
I watch maybe 2-3 hours per week on Disney+.
I won't lie, the video content on Warhammer+ is less than I expected, but is probably about 1-2 hours per week but I also have access to the vault and the app.
So for me, personally, Warhammer+ is much better value for money than Disney+.
Personally I was only interested in the advertised streaming service, and the rest don't do anything to me. For that, subbing month to month is simply not an interesting proposition.
But it will probably be worth to sub a month a year to binge it.
Slipspace wrote: GW themselves marketed WH+ as a streaming service.
They didn't though. It was clear since day one that streamed content was just one part of the overall product:
What is Warhammer+? Warhammer+ is a subscription service for Warhammer fans. It’s a whole new way to explore the worlds of Warhammer, where you’ll find original animations and shows, access to Warhammer apps, a digital vault packed with lore and magazines, subscriber offers, and exclusive miniatures. There’s something in Warhammer+ for every hobbyist.
What’s included in a Warhammer+ subscription? An ever-growing collection of animated Warhammer series
Weekly Warhammer TV shows featuring Battle Reports, lore investigations, and painting masterclasses
A digital vault of Warhammer lore and magazines
Subscriber access to Warhammer apps, including Warhammer 40,000: The App and Warhammer Age of Sigmar: The App
Premium access to our official events
Exclusive subscriber offers
A free, exclusive Citadel miniature every year, and the opportunity to buy a second, different exclusive miniature as well
As time goes on, even more features will be added to your subscription
For anyone not using any of the other features, then WH+ is unlikely to be good value solely for streaming.
They emphasized the animations and shows from day one in all promotional materials. They let you watch one free episode of hammer and sickle, not free issue of old WD.
The money is insignifcant (to me) but not alot there yet especialyl since no interest in painting etc tutorials.
Was(still) hoping for some animated versions of the AOS cartoons as I enjoy those
Such a shame Josh Reynolds not there to write some stories.
Be nice if they tied in with Cubicle 7 re the rpg stuff - they seem to be working very closely
Get Becca Scott in to play some games - that would be cool (for me at least)
I think what makes people frustrated about Warhammer + is that it is simply one more incredibly underwhelming GW product that is purposefully hamstrung by GW in the perceived interests of their business strategy.
Time and time again GW release products where they search for the bare minimum amount of resources to be invested into a product that then scrapes the ceiling of the absolute maximum price point (for example all the terrible video games they release, or the barely edited print rules material such as the KT compendium).
The difference here is that animations are an art form where talent can really shine through even on a low budget. Based upon the animations GW has released thus far, its obvious they're not particularly interested in producing stellar quality animations.
They just want to ram whatever they can out the door as cheaply as possible. That is their own mistake to make and it remains to be seen whether or not they will pay for that in the long run.
All I know is that if their studio cannot scrape together animations that look even half as good as anime from the 1970s, they've really started thing off on the wrong foot.
Maybe it's time to move this thread to General Discussion?
No, we are comparing streaming services that are relatively closely priced and the value they offer for said comparable price.
I understand Disney has a huge back catalog, unspeakable financial resources, and so on. But, the flipside of this is GWS had no pressure to start a streaming service at all, or right now when they didn't have time to develop launch content.
If you can't deliver nearly the same value, you maybe shouldn't charge nearly the same price. If Games Workshop starts selling Warhammer Coffee and it's only an ounce per cup, they can't maybe shouldn't charge $4.50 a cup.
The only real differentiator is the mini, which is a fair argument and one I had forgotten to factor. For me personally it's not worth it but of course that's gonna vary very much by the person.
My real frustration is not in W+ per se, but that Games Workshop consistently has these great opportunities to expand the universe and always cheaps out/halfasses it and ultimately, I think, damages the brand a bit. I think most gamers now associate Warhammer video games with lousy quality because of all the budget shovelware they licensed, despite KNOWING how that works when Nintendo did that with the Wii - for every Total War, there are 20 mobile-quality games it seems.
The talking heads for lore is the exact same kind of half assed penny pinching. They have an incredible library of art assets, and they could have leveraged that. They could have done non-complex but still visually impressive animation by partially animating still images (like this or this, which they already do).
It's just frustrating more than anything. I'll have to revisit it in a year or so when they finally have built up a library, ie, when they should have launched.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I think it's weird that the drop pods didn't make any attempt to slow down. They didn't fire their retros and just slammed into the ground.
Because it's more metal this way!
I'm joking, but that might actually be the reason. Compared to the larger variety we got from Hammer and Bolter thus far, Angels of Death seems to go the bolter porn route pretty heavily. The creator might be looking to create something impactful to match. In this case literally.
Isn't that also how Drop Pods were depicted in Dawn of War? No retro boosters, just hitting with full force and scattering whatever stands close?
Mr Morden wrote: The money is insignifcant (to me) but not alot there yet especialyl since no interest in painting etc tutorials.
It's funny. I have much the same attitude towards the painting tutorials, but since I'm paying for them I'm going to watch them regardless. You never know, I might actually learn something in the process.
Mr Morden wrote: Was(still) hoping for some animated versions of the AOS cartoons as I enjoy those
It's striking how pretty much the entire thing is currently about 40k. That doesn't personally affect me as I'm currently more interested in 40k, but you would think a little more even distribution between 40k and AoS would be desirable to GW. Yeah, 40k is more popular. Yeah, there's the risk that with the very limited updates we get, getting more AoS would result in getting less 40k and that might cause some complaints. And it doesn't even look like GW is tying the released content in with the miniature and book releases of that week, which would at least serve as an adequate explanation for lopsidedness.
So perhaps not a one for one release schedule, but at least something each week to not give the AoS fans the impression that they're considered irrelevant.
I think if you're thinking of Warhammer + as a streaming service and nothing else then you're not really thinking of it in the right way.
It's NOT a streaming service.
It's a pair of game apps; video streaming, magazine/publication back access, model+voucher service all in one.
If you compare any one element to a similar "monthly paid for" service then its never going to compare favourably for all of them. We can compare it to any of the big TV studios and it will NEVER amount to value for money purely as a streaming service in terms of volume of material. Even if GW spent every bit of profit they'd still have to take, what, 30-40 years to build up the kind of library the TV studios have. It's just not on the cards to even compete.
So you've got to consider the price as the whole package deal, even if you, the individual, only want to interact with one part of it.
I do agree I'm surprised AoS doesn't feature as much either; then again I think its because 40K is the lions share of everything and because when GW was likely pitching and designing the animations, AoS was just nothing back then; meanwhile 40K has so many options they are spoilt for choice. Who knows this might mean that hte AoS stuff ends up technically better as its made with a higher budget as a result of Warhammer+ doing well as an investment.
So you've got to consider the price as the whole package deal, even if you, the individual, only want to interact with one part of it.
No, we don't have to consider that as individuals only wanting to interact with one part of the service. That is quite literally the opposite of what people do when considering something's subjective value.
Overread wrote: So you've got to consider the price as the whole package deal, even if you, the individual, only want to interact with one part of it.
I would have to... if I had to do an official review of it, or something. I'll do a "my needs" review, which is kind of all I'm interested in.
I'd wager that it will be what would matter to anyone actually pondering a subscription ("Is this worth it to me?", not "is this objectively worth it?"), because after all it's what makes sense.
Also, most of that is only interesting if you're an actual player/painter/maybe minis collector, but that leaves out a lot of people that likes the different GW setting's lore.
For example, I roleplay with a group on which most are very big HH novels fans, but don't have a single mini or have played a single physical GW game. Would this be interesting to them? Would they have to consider the price of the whole package deal to see if it's worth it for them to subscribe?
I actually disagree and wholeheartedly believe it was pitched as a streaming service, the animations got all the attention in promotion, with the addition of battle reports, painting guides and lore videos, but the animation was pitched as the premier aspect. The addition of the vault was never really fleshed out and was to me advertised as an added bonus not a core component.
This attempt by others to now say it isn't just a streaming service is not the product we were sold upon... I have a subscription, I'll keep my subscription for a while, but the animation numbers need to pick up, and quick. If it is one episode per series, per week, I won't be keeping it for the full year, cool vindicare model or not.
Yeah its thew whole package that really turns me off personally.
As it stands I would welcome a more muscular GW investment on the stream side of the package since, let's face it, its the novelty here. Miniatures, WD and apps we already have. A channel with everything in it not so much.
I wonder if the exclusive minis were always planned to be WH+ exclusives, or if they were originally planned to be for something else. Because if they were always planned to be for WH+, they must have planned out this thing many years in advance.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: I wonder if the exclusive minis were always planned to be WH+ exclusives, or if they were originally planned to be for something else. Because if they were always planned to be for WH+, they must have planned out this thing many years in advance.
And yet they made so little content.
I'll keep this to the Vindicare since I haven't much looked at the fat orc for lack of interest, but most of the CAD assets for the assassin and the statue would have existed already and the model isn't released until a year from now. They would have had to get started at the beginning of the year if we apply the minimum of 18 months lead time for army updates, which is a conservative estimate based on existing production processes more than strict needs to get a single model for each system into production.
The models give no useful indication of when Warhammer+ was conceived, one way or another.
How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else?
In addition to the mandalorian (which averaged 40 minutes per episode) they did
a) a mockumentary (about 35 minutes per episode)
b) 6 series of shorts (about 8 minutes per episode, on average, per 6)
c) about 4 docuseries (one with 60 minutes per episode, 3 of 25 minutes per episode, on average)
d) a reality show (60 minutes per episode.)
So, during the first month of disney+, the original content ascended to:
Or, in total: 160+140+192+540+240 = 1272 minutes of material or, in other words, 21 hours of newly made material... which must be combined with the gargantuan back catalogue they had.
Warhammer+? By the end of the month we will have 4 hours of content. Period. It doesn't compare.
You're right, it doesn't compare. In every other way, Disney+ is completely eclipsed by Warhammer+:
Disney+ miniatures= 0. Warhammer+ = 1
Disney+ gaming apps = 0. Warhammer+ = 1 so far, 1 to come
Disney+ archive written content = 0. Warhammer+ = 60 so far
Disney+ event stuff = 0. Warhammer+ = 0 so far but some to come
Warhammer+ is a GW subscription service. It's contains streaming certainly, but it is not purely a streaming service. A direct comparison is false either way you look at it.
P.S. I subscribe to Disney+ and enjoy their content. But i don't get pissed off with them that they're not delivering other things
How much original content was there on Disney+ when it launched, a few episodes of The Mandalorian? Anything else?
In addition to the mandalorian (which averaged 40 minutes per episode) they did
a) a mockumentary (about 35 minutes per episode)
b) 6 series of shorts (about 8 minutes per episode, on average, per 6)
c) about 4 docuseries (one with 60 minutes per episode, 3 of 25 minutes per episode, on average)
d) a reality show (60 minutes per episode.)
So, during the first month of disney+, the original content ascended to:
Or, in total: 160+140+192+540+240 = 1272 minutes of material or, in other words, 21 hours of newly made material... which must be combined with the gargantuan back catalogue they had.
Warhammer+? By the end of the month we will have 4 hours of content. Period. It doesn't compare.
You're right, it doesn't compare. In every other way, Disney+ is completely eclipsed by Warhammer+:
Disney+ miniatures= 0. Warhammer+ = 1
Disney+ gaming apps = 0. Warhammer+ = 1 so far, 1 to come
Disney+ archive written content = 0. Warhammer+ = 60 so far
Disney+ event stuff = 0. Warhammer+ = 0 so far but some to come
Warhammer+ is a GW subscription service. It's contains streaming certainly, but it is not purely a streaming service. A direct comparison is false either way you look at it.
P.S. I subscribe to Disney+ and enjoy their content. But i don't get pissed off with them that they're not delivering other things
This is the most sad and pathetic retort i have seen in years.
Well, if you do a full comparison, then, including things like old magazines and what not... the full back catalog of Disney + (with the included Pixar, National Geographic and Star channels, and remembering that it includes Disney, but also Marvel and everything Sta Wars) would still be thousands of times (literal thousands) bigger.
And well, as I said above, for many of the fans of the Warhammer settings, which are not gamers but still like the settings... some of the magazines will be interesting, but the miniatures, gaming apps and probably the events will mean jack and gak to them.
At the end of the day, what is inclued will mean to some people, and will be dead weight to some other. Expecting the second group to think that the added stuff includes value is, IMHO, ludicrous.
But in the same vein, expecting the first group not to find value on that stuff is equally ludicrous, so there's that.
Possibly stupid question, but looking at the Vault offering, it looks like you get the last two years of White Dwarf editions. Given the price of a White Dwarf subscription, wouldn’t Warhammer+ be a better option?
Gordy2000 wrote: Possibly stupid question, but looking at the Vault offering, it looks like you get the last two years of White Dwarf editions. Given the price of a White Dwarf subscription, wouldn’t Warhammer+ be a better option?
Or am I missing something?
Right now the price of a White Dwarf Subscription gives you a few bonuses
1) You can read them as they come out, not in a years time through the Vault
2) You get a physical product, whilst the vault is fully digital - along with all the risks and benefits that brings. Eg the Vault could go away one day and if you don't pay for a month you'd also lose access - your physical WD though won't just vanish.
That said I'm honestly considering switching over and I wonder if Warhammer+ might actually be the thing that kills off WD. I'm a big fan of print media, but at the same time I've found less and less to engage with at times with WD and things like short stories are something I can easily catch up on in the vault in a years time.
Thanks Overread. I used to have a WD subscription but storing the copies became an issue (plus they jacked up the price here).
In NZ, Warhammer+ is less than a WD subscription and the Vault is only a couple of months behind in editions, so it’s worth considering for that alone.
Overread wrote: I think if you're thinking of Warhammer + as a streaming service and nothing else then you're not really thinking of it in the right way.
It's NOT a streaming service.
It's a pair of game apps; video streaming, magazine/publication back access, model+voucher service all in one.
If you compare any one element to a similar "monthly paid for" service then its never going to compare favourably for all of them. We can compare it to any of the big TV studios and it will NEVER amount to value for money purely as a streaming service in terms of volume of material. Even if GW spent every bit of profit they'd still have to take, what, 30-40 years to build up the kind of library the TV studios have. It's just not on the cards to even compete.
So you've got to consider the price as the whole package deal, even if you, the individual, only want to interact with one part of it.
I do agree I'm surprised AoS doesn't feature as much either; then again I think its because 40K is the lions share of everything and because when GW was likely pitching and designing the animations, AoS was just nothing back then; meanwhile 40K has so many options they are spoilt for choice. Who knows this might mean that hte AoS stuff ends up technically better as its made with a higher budget as a result of Warhammer+ doing well as an investment.
Ignoring your blatant misrepresentation of how GW has been spruiking warhammer plus
Yes, oh wow stand in awe of the value lads, as the service includes an already developed 40k app(which should have been FREE in the first place) which has terrible ratings of 1.9 stars on google play and 1.7 on the apple store.
An app so bad, it forced GW, of all companies, to drop the price and when that didn't work....chuck it into warhammer plus
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dendarien wrote: So if you subscribe what do you get in the 40K app exactly?
So how would "Warhammer+" compare to say a "Silver" vault plan (~$10 per month) with https://www.miniwargaming.com/?
These guys also have an extensive back-catalogue and arguably has done more for the community in added content.
Just throwing this out there for those who want a bit more meat on their 40k bones.
Overread wrote: I think if you're thinking of Warhammer + as a streaming service and nothing else then you're not really thinking of it in the right way.
I think you don't need to tell people how they _need_ to think of a product someone is trying to sell them.
Just accept that they don't want what you are peddling on behalf of GW.
So you've got to consider the price as the whole package deal, even if you, the individual, only want to interact with one part of it.
No, we don't have to consider that as individuals only wanting to interact with one part of the service. That is quite literally the opposite of what people do when considering something's subjective value.
Well if you artificially drop most of content of course it's going to drop value.
If you artificially drop 99.9999% shows in netfiix is netflix worth it?
Disney+ launah. Take only shorts. Was disney+ worth it? Can't consider rest. Just shorts.
I think people are going to compare it with the closest thing they can think off, problem is this bundle of things is just too random.
I mean a mini, an app that helps with a tabletop game, digital magazine and some small reviews and anims all bundled into Warhammer+... Its almost like they have a collection of random bits put them all in one box and ask for subs to drop feed the content monthly. None of those random bits alone would justify a sub.
NAVARRO wrote: I think people are going to compare it with the closest thing they can think off, problem is this bundle of things is just too random.
I mean a mini, an app that helps with a tabletop game, digital magazine and some small reviews and anims all bundled into Warhammer+... Its almost like they have a collection of random bits put them all in one box and ask for subs to drop feed the content monthly. None of those random bits alone would justify a sub.
And all of them will only be interesting for a subset of people.But you pay them all (except the mini, maybe? Can you not get it and get a discount?)
Additionally, in regards to the Warhammer+ vs Disney+ launch content and new series... The Mandalorian is a far far far superior product than anything GW will probably ever be capable of producing, it also had a lot more hype and excitement around it also, so the quality justifies the price and low turnover of series (initially), Angels of Death and Hammer and Bolter are subjectively 25% of the quality of the mandalorian at best and the cost of the service is not 25% of Disney+. Quality and quantity matter, but one can pay for lapses in the other, Warhammer+ isn't hitting the mark either way at the moment.
You absolutely cannot compare really, especially when Warhammer+ were announcing 12 or so stand alone series they had in production, and we've seen 2 so far and zero idea when the others will come.
Comparing Disney and Games Workshop in any way is laughable.
Disney-
Founded in 1923
American Corporation with a net worth of $337 billion(macro trends.net)
12 theme parks
Known for its film studio division which includes- Pixar, Lucasfilm, 20th Century, Marvel Studios, and Searchlight
Games Workshop-
Founded in 1975
British corporation with a net worth of $485 million(googled and converted pound sterling to dollars)
1 exhibition
Started as a board game manufacturer and now produces high quality miniatures
We might as well shut down warhammer world while we shut down the app.
kodos wrote: GW started as European distributor of D&D
Wikipedia lied to me ‘ Games Workshop was originally a manufacturer of wooden boards for games including backgammon, mancala, nine men's morris, and Go.’
H.B.M.C. wrote: It was fun when the Techmarine showed up at the docking area to see what was going on.
MaxT wrote: So you have no response, so go for an ad hominem instead?
He didn't say you were sad and pathetic, he said your post was. There's a difference.
And it was, because your comparisons were very silly. I could just as easily go:
Disney+ MCU movies = 22. Warhammer+ MCU movies = 0
... and it would be just as true, and just as meaningless. Don't make vacuous fallacy arguments.
Correct. The initial argument that Disney+ had 200 hours or whatever of content and Warhammer+ having 4 is equally as true, equally as meaningless, and equally vacuous and fallacious.
Just one animation again this week, and no lore masters...
As much as the Vindicare is a nice model, it doesn't represent value at the current release rate for a subscription for me, I feel like I'll actually be paying £30+ for the model at this rate, rather than it being a free/added bonus for subscribing for the year. The voucher also doesn't hold too much value, I'm effectively getting a £5 voucher if I keep the subscription for another month after this which I do not want to now.
I'll be cancelling my subscription and picking it up for a month or so at some point next year to binge some shows. I haven't got FOMO about the current shows, I don't feel as if they can be spoiled, and even if they do, it wouldn't ruin watching them for me.
Very poor release amount. And the narrative game may be fun to watch, one a month also isn't enough to keep it for me.
I'm not a GW hater by any means, like many I have felt a bit let down by them in their practices in the past but overall I'm usually happy with the product still. This feels like a cash grab though to be honest. I'm also aware they may be running at a significant loss that would recoup in years to come, but it is evident now that there isn't enough of a stable footing (content) to build upon.
And like I said before, warhammer+ was sold on the animation mainly and other videos, everything else is an added perk, the vaultt doens't hold much value to myself other than being a niche time filler.
Also, where on earth has hammer and bolter disappeared too?
It really seems that gw doesn't have the resources to be able to make a such a service worthwhile.
There's some interesting content, but they should have used another model to sell them. As is, the comparaison to other streaming services is to easy to make, and doesn't make W+ look good
streetsamurai wrote: It really seems that gw doesn't have the resources to be able to make a such a service worthwhile.
There's some interesting content, but they should have used another model to sell them. As is, the comparaison to other streaming services is to easy to make, and doesn't make W+ look good
It's funny because if all they let you a subscription to at least access all current Codexes/Battletomes (ideally older ones too, but come on, let's not get too deep into fantasy land) it'd probably be heralded by most people as a brilliant service with everything else as a bonus provided it remained in the £5-£7.50 range.
GW being the digital dinosaurs they are will probably get the hint in another five years and still be praised to high heavens for their genius though.
Arbitrator wrote: It's funny because if all they let you a subscription to at least access all current Codexes/Battletomes (ideally older ones too, but come on, let's not get too deep into fantasy land) it'd probably be heralded by most people as a brilliant service with everything else as a bonus provided it remained in the £5-£7.50 range.
I feel that's absolutely true, and it will actually be a great service for anyone actively playing.
Gordy2000 wrote: Possibly stupid question, but looking at the Vault offering, it looks like you get the last two years of White Dwarf editions. Given the price of a White Dwarf subscription, wouldn’t Warhammer+ be a better option?
Or am I missing something?
The local theory is that's why they're including physical stuff like cards & transfers with WD more often - to add value to the print editions.
Gordy2000 wrote: Possibly stupid question, but looking at the Vault offering, it looks like you get the last two years of White Dwarf editions. Given the price of a White Dwarf subscription, wouldn’t Warhammer+ be a better option?
Or am I missing something?
The local theory is that's why they're including physical stuff like cards & transfers with WD more often - to add value to the print editions.
Thing is, WD went DOWNHILL over the years
Back in the day that was typical. Sometimes you'd get minis
streetsamurai wrote: It really seems that gw doesn't have the resources to be able to make a such a service worthwhile.
There's some interesting content, but they should have used another model to sell them. As is, the comparaison to other streaming services is to easy to make, and doesn't make W+ look good
It's funny because if all they let you a subscription to at least access all current Codexes/Battletomes (ideally older ones too, but come on, let's not get too deep into fantasy land) it'd probably be heralded by most people as a brilliant service with everything else as a bonus provided it remained in the £5-£7.50 range.
GW being the digital dinosaurs they are will probably get the hint in another five years and still be praised to high heavens for their genius though.
Indeed. There really should be a way to access codex without having to buy them at full price (yes there's pirated version on the net, but i mean legally).
Its insane that unless you're willing to shell a thousand bucks, you have no idea what's the army of your opponent
GW's need of still utilising printed media for rules is now seriously becoming outdated. Phones, tablets etc make them no longer required.
And for the obvious arguments of 'I don't want to carry tablets etc around with me' release the core rules as a condensed PDF in a separate file that the customer can print out if they want (or even better, partner with a print to order company and let them do it for you whilst still earning some £ on top), leave all the lore and pics in the digital version, and then regular ongoing updates and tweaks are needed.
In regards to WD, yep, more minis, card terrain, dice, brushes, short story novellas.... If they want to keep it going, it needs more free faff, and GW have an abundance of certain models that have moulds they don't sell often that can be chucked in. It would never have a free mini every month, but if it were too, I'd consider a subscription just for the bits to go in my box alone and then have the added bonus of reading the magazine.
Print media is seriously outdated though, and many companies will be almost forced to move away from it anyway via green incentives and/or punishments (tax).
I'd argue that GW's print media including its lore and artwork, is what makes them and continues to make them, a much bigger player in the market compared to their competition.
The power of the codex is specifically that its not just rules. It includes lore and artwork and some model work which all help to provide multiple interest and attention grabbing points for a new customer. That new customer might be new to the game entirely or new to a faction. The point is that the codex provides multiple media coverage. And by being an "essential" purchase it ensures that people do interact with those aspects.
This then helps reinforce the sale of BL books; lore/art books; artwork (though GW overprices and under markets that for reasons known only to them).
Yes you could make it all run on apps and release rules-only documents. The problem is you'd quickly end up with people not engaging with the lore and art because it would always been an "optional" purchase and a new box of models would often trump their purchase choices. So they'd quickly end up not engaging with the lore; not reading BL books; not taking up other areas of the hobby and interest.
And in the end that removes interest hooks for them in the game. They end up less invested in an army and the game.
The only place splitting mostly works is the Big Rule Book and even then GW thrusts them upon customers through the big starter sets where that book is basically free.
Heck early Codex were almost all rules. At £12 or thereabouts in 3rd ed the Tyranid codex was all rules, black and white, paperback and had perhaps a handful of pages on lore.
Today its £30, hardback, full colour and has over 100 pages of lore.
GW is now the only one were you get rules only for digital
Everyone else is selling full books digital as well as printed books
And most have the pure digital rules out for free
And even if the full codex is the main selling point with artwork and lore (which is not worth to buy each new Edition as it mostly stays the same), there is no reason of not selling the digital rules as stand alone codes for the app
Everyone who already has a single Codex has no benefit of paying again for the same lore and artwork just to get up to date rules
the only advantage is to force people to by the physical book or pirate the stuff
Overread wrote: Heck early Codex were almost all rules. At £12 or thereabouts in 3rd ed the Tyranid codex was all rules, black and white, paperback and had perhaps a handful of pages on lore.
The 2nd ed codices and books starting back up halfway through 3rd ed and later all use the same format, basically. The first half of 3rd ed codices were an aberration and were very much decried at the time for the lack of background material. It's no accident that GW has returned to and otherwise held on to the same format for almost thirty years. The demand is there and I'd argue that at least at the time it was clearly a majority of customers in favor of it. Sensibilities may change, and who knows how numerous the rules only crowd is these days, but I tend to think of the codex format the same way as Overread. It's a boon to GW that contributes to their success and is still widely supported by the customer base.
When we're talking about steps backward it's dropping e-book codices that's a real bogus decision by GW. It's likely not even that they feared for physical book sales because of the electronic competition, but because it was competition for the 40k app (and coming AoS app) and GW would rather maximize that subscription money than risk people opting for electronic codices if given the choice.
I'm actually worrid that 9th ed codex have taken a step back. A lot of unit profiles are just gone from them, so instead of a page of lore and a bit of art per unit (or unit group); its down to the short few lines on the units profile page.
They don't really put the effort in to the modelling, painting and photography for codexes that they used to. These days they just print the product photos for whatever the new units they've added since the last codex were. Anybody who's still buying them for "hobby" content is wasting their money, you get more just from going on the GW website. Such a shame. As an example, I'm looking at the old Phil Kelly dark eldar codex and there's 16 pages of photography here, loads of alternate colour schemes they've painted up, a few large display photos of big battle scenes with them fighting other armies. Compare that to the most recent Space Marines book, which despite having so much more to draw on and being a larger book has a mere 12 page photo section, only one of which is a big battle scene. It's appalling really
Overread wrote: I'm actually worrid that 9th ed codex have taken a step back. A lot of unit profiles are just gone from them, so instead of a page of lore and a bit of art per unit (or unit group); its down to the short few lines on the units profile page.
That's not a good development. I guess I'm not up to date. I haven't been able to bring myself to waste any money on a codex since early 8th ed.
Overread wrote: Heck early Codex were almost all rules. At £12 or thereabouts in 3rd ed the Tyranid codex was all rules, black and white, paperback and had perhaps a handful of pages on lore.
Today its £30, hardback, full colour and has over 100 pages of lore.
No, they absolutely weren't. There were codexes before 3rd edition, you know , and 3rd ed's codexes were specifically done as "just rules". But the original ones were kind of the setting bibles of the time.
The problem nowadays, of course, it's that codex turnaround is so fast that you're paying time and time again for the same fluff texts.
Is there a thread just for the Warhammer animations and discussion.
Not their worth or all this chat (which this thread really can now just be about content added as opposed to each week another discussion of Is It Worth It Now Yet?).
Jammer87 wrote: Comparing Disney and Games Workshop in any way is laughable.
Disney-
Founded in 1923
American Corporation with a net worth of $337 billion(macro trends.net)
12 theme parks
Known for its film studio division which includes- Pixar, Lucasfilm, 20th Century, Marvel Studios, and Searchlight
Games Workshop-
Founded in 1975
British corporation with a net worth of $485 million(googled and converted pound sterling to dollars)
1 exhibition
Started as a board game manufacturer and now produces high quality miniatures
We might as well shut down warhammer world while we shut down the app.
Corporations aren't measured in size/clout by net worth, they are measured by market cap. The number you gave for Disney is actually their market cap. GW's is ~4B USD. Yes, I think the comparisons between Disney+ and W+ are bad, but let's not excuse GW with the ol' Mom & Pop store routine.
Overread wrote: I'd argue that GW's print media including its lore and artwork, is what makes them and continues to make them, a much bigger player in the market compared to their competition.
The power of the codex is specifically that its not just rules. It includes lore and artwork and some model work which all help to provide multiple interest and attention grabbing points for a new customer. That new customer might be new to the game entirely or new to a faction. The point is that the codex provides multiple media coverage. And by being an "essential" purchase it ensures that people do interact with those aspects.
This then helps reinforce the sale of BL books; lore/art books; artwork (though GW overprices and under markets that for reasons known only to them).
Yes you could make it all run on apps and release rules-only documents. The problem is you'd quickly end up with people not engaging with the lore and art because it would always been an "optional" purchase and a new box of models would often trump their purchase choices. So they'd quickly end up not engaging with the lore; not reading BL books; not taking up other areas of the hobby and interest.
And in the end that removes interest hooks for them in the game. They end up less invested in an army and the game.
The only place splitting mostly works is the Big Rule Book and even then GW thrusts them upon customers through the big starter sets where that book is basically free.
Heck early Codex were almost all rules. At £12 or thereabouts in 3rd ed the Tyranid codex was all rules, black and white, paperback and had perhaps a handful of pages on lore.
Today its £30, hardback, full colour and has over 100 pages of lore.
Didn't they gut huge portions of the lore out of the 9th 'dexes though?
And I definitely remember my £12 Guard codex having lore. Not as much as you saw in 8th, but it's there.
Indeed. There really should be a way to access codex without having to buy them at full price (yes there's pirated version on the net, but i mean legally).
Its insane that unless you're willing to shell a thousand bucks, you have no idea what's the army of your opponent
Owning every single faction codex is not, and never has been, a requirement to play the game. Let's not pull the "Ugh I can't play Warhammer because GW is MAKING ME buy all the codexes and I can't afford that!" game.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: GW's need of still utilising printed media for rules is now seriously becoming outdated. Phones, tablets etc make them no longer required.
GW has deliberately tied themselves to a physical supply chain rather than allow customers to buy purely digital codes. They've got a serious case of Good Idea Fairy over there.
Not really sure its possible to argue that GW print material is significant part of their success. I think its an archaic and consumer alienating tactic to continue a revenue stream that the Corp is afraid to lose.
But all GW print materials are full of typos, misprints, layout errors. Its actually shockingly amateur. The average highschool aged zine/manga creator has better copy-editing than GW.
Go take a look at the new 40k logo. It's off-centre, and it still has not been corrected in any of their ongoing publications. Or the absolutely horrible dimensions of the figure on the cover of the Black Templar codex. This is being published by a professional art/design studio.
GW should abandon their print media simply because it reveals too much how little they think of their customer's discretionary spending habits.
I think you're massively overstating the typo issue seeing as the only one I have in any of my books is the named Killteam being 3 Power instead of 8.
Abandoning print media would be a monumentally stupid business decision.
It absolutely was a big part of their success back in the day. When a coded was an impulse purchase instead of an investment, people would buy many codices just to know what other armies’ rules were, and then get sucked in by the fluff, or buy for the fluff because they heard some talk about interesting back story, and then get sucked in by artwork and think “well, I already have the rules.”
There’s a lot more engagement with games that supply background and rules together as opposed to rules pamphlets that can only draw in customers enticed by those particular rules. And looking at extinct games, the ones people still talk about are the ones with captivating background and aesthetic design.
Gregor Samsa wrote: Not really sure its possible to argue that GW print material is significant part of their success. I think its an archaic and consumer alienating tactic to continue a revenue stream that the Corp is afraid to lose.
But all GW print materials are full of typos, misprints, layout errors. Its actually shockingly amateur. The average highschool aged zine/manga creator has better copy-editing than GW.
Go take a look at the new 40k logo. It's off-centre, and it still has not been corrected in any of their ongoing publications. Or the absolutely horrible dimensions of the figure on the cover of the Black Templar codex. This is being published by a professional art/design studio.
GW should abandon their print media simply because it reveals too much how little they think of their customer's discretionary spending habits.
I would go that far and say that much less people would play 40k, if there would not be a russian archive with digital files for the rules, and everyone would have the pay full price books
and the current model with no good digital rules is trying to shut this down
But we will see how this is going with AoS, were free rules were an essential part of the game for a lot of players and I don't know it what is going to happen if those disappear
It is actually the R in "warhammer" in the new logo which is off-centre. It intersects with the lines outlining the logo. Again these are very small and trivial things.
But all the print material GW releases has errors: rules errors requiring day 1 FAQs resulting from poor typesetting and document formatting and lax proofreading. Its just clearly rushed and lazy. And again, this is published by a professional art studio.
Indeed. There really should be a way to access codex without having to buy them at full price (yes there's pirated version on the net, but i mean legally).
Its insane that unless you're willing to shell a thousand bucks, you have no idea what's the army of your opponent
Owning every single faction codex is not, and never has been, a requirement to play the game. Let's not pull the "Ugh I can't play Warhammer because GW is MAKING ME buy all the codexes and I can't afford that!" game.
Gregor Samsa wrote: It is actually the R in "warhammer" in the new logo which is off-centre. It intersects with the lines outlining the logo. Again these are very small and trivial things.
It cannot have been intentional as the new logo is an entire rebrand of the design font. The warhammer word is clearly not properly spaced/dimensions. I guess it could have been done on purpose? But it is still objectively incorrect graphic design.
Gregor Samsa wrote: It cannot have been intentional as the new logo is an entire rebrand of the design font. The warhammer word is clearly not properly spaced/dimensions. I guess it could have been done on purpose? But it is still objectively incorrect graphic design.
And yet again, the 'R' in the 3rd edition logo has the same 'problems' that you're going on about with the 9th edition logo as seen in the spoilered image I posted upthread. It is an intentional design choice on GW's part.
Gregor Samsa wrote: It cannot have been intentional as the new logo is an entire rebrand of the design font. The warhammer word is clearly not properly spaced/dimensions. I guess it could have been done on purpose? But it is still objectively incorrect graphic design.
And yet again, the 'R' in the 3rd edition logo has the same 'problems' that you're going on about with the 9th edition logo as seen in the spoilered image I posted upthread. It is an intentional design choice on GW's part.
Or a mistake thoughtlessly copied. It happens more often than you might think.
Gregor Samsa wrote: It cannot have been intentional as the new logo is an entire rebrand of the design font. The warhammer word is clearly not properly spaced/dimensions. I guess it could have been done on purpose? But it is still objectively incorrect graphic design.
And yet again, the 'R' in the 3rd edition logo has the same 'problems' that you're going on about with the 9th edition logo as seen in the spoilered image I posted upthread. It is an intentional design choice on GW's part.
Or a mistake thoughtlessly copied. It happens more often than you might think.
How dare you, GW never thoughtlessly copied a mistake! Never ever!
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both for survival and dominance at the same time."
This is literally the first sentence in the introductory paragraph of presenting the entire "lore" of the 40k universe and it is wrong! Truly astounding.
I really just cannot believe how lazy, lazy, lazy GW is with this printed product! This book retails for $50! This must have been copypastad from elsewhere as well, which means its written equally poorly in another location.
But look. I've said my piece and I will not beat the dead horse any more past this point.
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both for survival and dominance at the same time."
This is literally the first sentence in the introductory paragraph of presenting the entire "lore" of the 40k universe and it is wrong! Truly astounding.
I really just cannot believe how lazy, lazy, lazy GW is with this printed product! This book retails for $50! This must have been copypastad from elsewhere as well, which means its written equally poorly in another location.
But look. I've said my piece and I will not beat the dead horse any more past this point.
It took me three tries to figure out the issue in that sentence. It's definitely a mistake and I'm not arguing that. I'm just pointing out that sometimes, things slip past multiple editing runs, multiple times.
There was a version of the 40k logo, used on the Indomitus trailer(s), which didn't have the janky R. They just stuck with the off-centre version for everything else for some reason...
When we're talking about steps backward it's dropping e-book codices that's a real bogus decision by GW. It's likely not even that they feared for physical book sales because of the electronic competition, but because it was competition for the 40k app (and coming AoS app) and GW would rather maximize that subscription money than risk people opting for electronic codices if given the choice.
The thing is, that doesn’t justify the retrograde step either, because you get a code in the physical codex to get the rules in the app, so you don’t have to subscribe anyway. And there is literally no difference in income for GW in someone buying a physical codex, using the code and not subscribing than someone buying a digital codex and not subscribing.
It’s honestly a stupid, baffling and backwards decision and it really annoys me as I don’t want a pile of physical books with a limited lifespan clogging up my shelves, I like having the rules updated regularly with the latest FAQs and the digital codices (particularly the iBooks) were a quality product with useful features (rules pop ups, cross links, etc.).
Gert wrote: I think you're massively overstating the typo issue seeing as the only one I have in any of my books is the named Killteam being 3 Power instead of 8.
Abandoning print media would be a monumentally stupid business decision.
It's a given that any book you have will have at least one typo in it - the questions are a, whether you've spotted it or not; and b, whether the typo is significant.
For you, the PL one you mention is one you've spotted because it ties to the rules, and that makes it significant - and more visible.
In the case of Gregor's sentence from the background, it's less obvious, not hugely significant (though no doubt annoying) and someone reading casually is unlikely to notice it.
Which other books do you have, btw? I'm sure we could provide examples of typos in each of them.
I do agree with you, though, that abandoning print media wouldn't be a good idea - but neither is abandoning those people that just want to buy a digital codex from you, assuming there are enough of them to make the cost worthwhile (and I have no numbers on that either way).
And to top it all, there is no mechanism to just buy the codex in the app; you have to buy the physical codex, because even subscribing just gets you the data sheets, not all of the rules.
I also think the new system is trash and was clearly an attempt by GW to contain all of its eggs in one basket rather than relying on a 3rd party to host its material.
As for the typos, if people can quickly provide reference to them then in the nicest way possible, you have way to much free time on your hands.
In general, if you're editing large walls of text, which the Codex editors absolutely are, then you're not going to catch every single word out of place. I once had an essay that had a typo that I missed, Word missed, my writing assistant app missed, and the lecturer marking the essay missed. That was only a 3k-ish word document as well.
lol due to lack of content to discuss on warhammer plus, people are picking apart the typography on the 40k logo...and grammatical structuring of sentences......haha
and yet theres people still insisting it's good value....
When we're talking about steps backward it's dropping e-book codices that's a real bogus decision by GW. It's likely not even that they feared for physical book sales because of the electronic competition, but because it was competition for the 40k app (and coming AoS app) and GW would rather maximize that subscription money than risk people opting for electronic codices if given the choice.
Seeing you don't get rules by subbing and don't need sub to use the app for your book...how is that working? Guy buy physical book, he uses it with app. No need to sub.
Danny76 wrote: Is there a thread just for the Warhammer animations and discussion.
Not their worth or all this chat (which this thread really can now just be about content added as opposed to each week another discussion of Is It Worth It Now Yet?).
None that I'm aware of. If you start one, be sure to post a link for those of us interested in such discussion.
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both for survival and dominance at the same time."
For non native speakers, what is the problem with it? I've read the occasional police headline that sounded more wrong.
You want to write it in one of these ways:
The war the Imperium fights is one of survival and dominance at the same time.
The war the Imperium fights is both for survival and dominance at the same time.
You can't have both "one of" and "for" in that position as they fulfill the same function of defining the "war" in a mutually exclusive way. It's just not grammatically sound.
There's a question of elegance in using both "both" and "at the same time" at the same time, but that's a stylistic consideration and doesn't make the grammar wrong.
When we're talking about steps backward it's dropping e-book codices that's a real bogus decision by GW. It's likely not even that they feared for physical book sales because of the electronic competition, but because it was competition for the 40k app (and coming AoS app) and GW would rather maximize that subscription money than risk people opting for electronic codices if given the choice.
Seeing you don't get rules by subbing and don't need sub to use the app for your book...how is that working? Guy buy physical book, he uses it with app. No need to sub.
In reply to this but also what Jadenim said, I'm letting my opinion of GW's workings get in the way of writing a more comprehensive post. Which is to say that I don't just expect GW to make stupid decisions but also expect them to be capable of justifying those stupid decisions with equally stupid reasoning.
So yes, I agree what I said isn't objectively sound, but I do not for one second believe that stops GW from rationalizing their decisions like that.
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both for survival and dominance at the same time."
For non native speakers, what is the problem with it? I've read the occasional police headline that sounded more wrong.
The sentence is grammatically weird.
They should remove either word 'both' or 'for' , having them one after the other is weird...
It's having the 'of' and 'for' that is the issue, the 'both' is fine, could be either:
"The war the Imperium fights is one both for survival and dominance at the same time."
or
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both survival and dominance at the same time."
or even
"The war the Imperium fights is one for both survival and dominance at the same time."
or
"The war the Imperium fights is one both of survival and dominance at the same time."
Though I imagine some of those versions are likely to be considered more grammatically correct than others, but they all read more correctly than the published one.
Gert wrote: I think you're massively overstating the typo issue seeing as the only one I have in any of my books is the named Killteam being 3 Power instead of 8.
Abandoning print media would be a monumentally stupid business decision.
The first two printings of the spanish version of the warcry core book were missing the "B" letter on its spine. That's pretty darn big.
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both for survival and dominance at the same time."
For non native speakers, what is the problem with it? I've read the occasional police headline that sounded more wrong.
The sentence is grammatically weird.
They should remove either word 'both' or 'for' , having them one after the other is weird...
It's having the 'of' and 'for' that is the issue, the 'both' is fine, could be either:
"The war the Imperium fights is one both for survival and dominance at the same time."
or
"The war the Imperium fights is one of both survival and dominance at the same time."
or even
"The war the Imperium fights is one for both survival and dominance at the same time."
or
"The war the Imperium fights is one both of survival and dominance at the same time."
Though I imagine some of those versions are likely to be considered more grammatically correct than others, but they all read more correctly than the published one.
Also, using "both" and "at the same time" is kind of redundant.
It kind of boggles my mind that a sentence like the one being discussed could make it through the editing process as is. Even if GW didn't put as many eyes on it as they should, presumably somebody first typed the sentence in Word (where Word would tell them it needed corrections) and then the typesetting software should have done the same thing for the actual codex publication. Do they just ignore the blue squiggly lines?
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It kind of boggles my mind that a sentence like the one being discussed could make it through the editing process as is. Even if GW didn't put as many eyes on it as they should, presumably somebody first typed the sentence in Word (where Word would tell them it needed corrections) and then the typesetting software should have done the same thing for the actual codex publication. Do they just ignore the blue squiggly lines?
GW did not have an editing process until recently, first draft was send direct to printing
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It kind of boggles my mind that a sentence like the one being discussed could make it through the editing process as is. Even if GW didn't put as many eyes on it as they should, presumably somebody first typed the sentence in Word (where Word would tell them it needed corrections) and then the typesetting software should have done the same thing for the actual codex publication. Do they just ignore the blue squiggly lines?
GW did not have an editing process until recently, first draft was send direct to printing
Gene St. Ealer wrote: It kind of boggles my mind that a sentence like the one being discussed could make it through the editing process as is. Even if GW didn't put as many eyes on it as they should, presumably somebody first typed the sentence in Word (where Word would tell them it needed corrections) and then the typesetting software should have done the same thing for the actual codex publication. Do they just ignore the blue squiggly lines?
GW did not have an editing process until recently, first draft was send direct to printing
It's a simple return on investment. The invest a minimum of effort($€£¥) and it earns them tons of $€£¥. They have zero incentive to change it. If it ain't broke(returns) don't fix it.
Warhammer + is a long term investment for me of $60. The type that will be worth it in the long run or not. (Sometimes I get burnt, like eternal crusade)
Jarms48 wrote: I'm not getting it. I might wait for a year and then by a single month to binge watch everything. That's about it.
And that's totally fair and clearly GW think many will that. Which is why they bundle in things like the models and the vouchers to encourage people to remain subscribed. Of course if you don't want either of those things then the service has much less value.
Alongside it you've also got app-access which is a good boon and, again, if you use it its worth the cost; but if you don't or if you feel the apps aren't any good (the 40K one seems to have some issues); then yep its got less value.
A discount voucher means nothing when their 3rd party retailers can offer upwards to 20% off their webstore prices.
Jarms48 wrote: I'm not getting it. I might wait for a year and then by a single month to binge watch everything. That's about it.
And that's totally fair and clearly GW think many will that. Which is why they bundle in things like the models and the vouchers to encourage people to remain subscribed. Of course if you don't want either of those things then the service has much less value.
Alongside it you've also got app-access which is a good boon and, again, if you use it its worth the cost; but if you don't or if you feel the apps aren't any good (the 40K one seems to have some issues); then yep its got less value.
A discount voucher means nothing when their 3rd party retailers can offer upwards to 20% off their webstore prices.
The unique model is the only interesting thing.
Unless maybe you use it on something that has a preorder bonus that's only through the GW website, on a collector's edition that can be tough to come by on 3rd party retailer sites, etc.
Jarms48 wrote: I'm not getting it. I might wait for a year and then by a single month to binge watch everything. That's about it.
And that's totally fair and clearly GW think many will that. Which is why they bundle in things like the models and the vouchers to encourage people to remain subscribed. Of course if you don't want either of those things then the service has much less value.
Alongside it you've also got app-access which is a good boon and, again, if you use it its worth the cost; but if you don't or if you feel the apps aren't any good (the 40K one seems to have some issues); then yep its got less value.
A discount voucher means nothing when their 3rd party retailers can offer upwards to 20% off their webstore prices.
The unique model is the only interesting thing.
a) they can't really offer 20% on webstore items(their own discount they get from GW is nearly zero on those. Were they offer 20% discount on those they would pay more to GW than they get from you.)
b) you buy 25$ with free shipping with 10$ discount, you pay 15$. You paid 15$ for 25$, 40% discount.
You were saying something about 20% discount? Try 40%.
I can count on 1 hand the number of times I've purchased something off the GW webstore.
If the voucher worked on FW then maybe it would make more sense(for me at least).
+ just doesn't have ANY value to me. I've spoken with my friends that are aware of 40k and gave them the speil for wh+, unsurprisingly ZERO of them had any interest. Whereas, when astartes and other indie animations were coming out they were interested/excited. The fact it was behind a paywall now just kinda turned them off.
you buy 25$ with free shipping with 10$ discount, you pay 15$. You paid 15$ for 25$, 40% discount.
Yes, but for $25 you can buy basically some paints and accessories. For space marines, 25 bucks gets you the 2015 commander kit, the cheapest Primaris model is $35. $25 is basically nothing in GW pricing terms.
Cronch wrote: Yes, but for $25 you can buy basically some paints and accessories. For space marines, 25 bucks gets you the 2015 commander kit, the cheapest Primaris model is $35. $25 is basically nothing in GW pricing terms.
For the $35 model it is still a ~29% discount. And can you really say you have enough paints, like... ever?
Cronch wrote: Yes, but for $25 you can buy basically some paints and accessories. For space marines, 25 bucks gets you the 2015 commander kit, the cheapest Primaris model is $35. $25 is basically nothing in GW pricing terms.
For the $35 model it is still a ~29% discount. And can you really say you have enough paints, like... ever?
I can, but also I'd rather order the paints directly from LGS than from GW, a least part of the money goes into local economy this way + wider selection than just GW paints (which are fine, but limited pallete)
The voucher might be an incentive if you buy directly from GW on the regular, but if you don't,you're paying money to pay a bit less money at the most expensive storefront out there. You pay 10 pounds to get a 10 pound discount on top of the actual price of whatever you're buying, you still end up giving GW extra money on top of the subscription. I could just...not pay 10 pounds for the 2 months sub and spend that 10 pounds directly with a store to get what I want. It's a small bonus if you already think the sub is worth a damn, if you don't you gain nothing from it.
I used my previous “spend X, get a voucher” voucher to get £10 off the Delaque Champions set. Brought the cash price down to £16, and I still qualified for free shipping.
Todays upload was a really good Angels of Death episode. Some good character development, finally see who is pulling the strings on the enemy side, and great action.
Spoiler:
Mephiston! Pretty cool scene, but his hair was weird.
I knew the Chaplain was toast the moment the episode started. Sad no space battle in this one.
Yeah so we're, what, four episodes into Angels of Death and whilst it is fun and certainly impressive for a one-man band (minus voice-acting and music, both of which are stellar), this is not the type of professional animation one puts as their first foot forward to entice people to buy into yet another streaming service in a world crowded with unnecessary streaming services. And the sound design is anaemic at best. The bolters sound more powerful than the Heavy Bolter. The chainsword sounded like it was behind a wall.
I think it's loads of fun, but it's still... I haven't got a better word right now... amateurish.
"Bet you couldn't do any better!!!" "It's not a streaming service!"
Yeah I've seen what else they're offering. It doesn't help the argument.
I did feel that the battle felt very quiet. Not in a "here's some backing music and low volume" kind of quiet to build atmosphere but more in a "we don't have enough/the right sounds" kind of quiet.
Which is odd, the combat last time was solid, if floaty in artistic/sculpting style; still pretty solid. This time it felt very hollow like they'd set the scene up with way too much for them to cover and then just didn't sort of cover it. They could have gone for some music or flashbacks or a few other tricks to cover that shortfall; indeed it almost feels like that's what they were going to do and then didn't
I've been really enjoying the battle reports, much clearer as to what is going on then a lot of the ones on YouTube. Normally they are either excruciatingly long and every roll is dissected to the nth degree or they are blink and you miss it and a narrative never builds. The WH+ ones seem to strike a nice balance with enough human interaction not to seem stale but a nice clear presentation to the game itself.
I do think that GW were silly to promote this so heavily as a streaming service initially. As a multimedia subscription for £50 a year it's really pretty good but as a streaming service it's lacking right now. That initial push as a pure streaming service has understandably become the predominate perception of the service.
I'm not opposed to marines dying, quite the opposite given the odds. But I feel like in the recent episode they all died in stupid ways. I'd expect more of a slog where smaller injuries build up or preoccupation with one foe leads to being struck down by another. Not 'ima stick mah hed in dis hole even tho we had enhanced visuals thru our helmets two episodes ago, ahh mah head's off am ded.'
Though the episode did a (perhaps unintentional?) excellent contrast between the charisma-8 pep talk of Mephy and the charisma-18 GSC one.
Tallonian4th wrote: I've been really enjoying the battle reports, much clearer as to what is going on then a lot of the ones on YouTube. Normally they are either excruciatingly long and every roll is dissected to the nth degree or they are blink and you miss it and a narrative never builds. The WH+ ones seem to strike a nice balance with enough human interaction not to seem stale but a nice clear presentation to the game itself.
I do think that GW were silly to promote this so heavily as a streaming service initially. As a multimedia subscription for £50 a year it's really pretty good but as a streaming service it's lacking right now. That initial push as a pure streaming service has understandably become the predominate perception of the service.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I knew the Chaplain was toast the moment the episode started. Sad no space battle in this one.
Yeah so we're, what, four episodes into Angels of Death and whilst it is fun and certainly impressive for a one-man band (minus voice-acting and music, both of which are stellar), this is not the type of professional animation one puts as their first foot forward to entice people to buy into yet another streaming service in a world crowded with unnecessary streaming services. And the sound design is anaemic at best. The bolters sound more powerful than the Heavy Bolter. The chainsword sounded like it was behind a wall.
I think it's loads of fun, but it's still... I haven't got a better word right now... amateurish.
"Bet you couldn't do any better!!!" "It's not a streaming service!"
Yeah I've seen what else they're offering. It doesn't help the argument.
a) they can't really offer 20% on webstore items(their own discount they get from GW is nearly zero on those. Were they offer 20% discount on those they would pay more to GW than they get from you.)
Retailers actually can give a 20% discount for gw webstore items, but they will be earning just a few %. They can give a reasonable 10%, though
I mentioned that it would be good to get access to a bunch of artwork through Warhammer+. Esp concept art and other such things.
I know GW have their Warhammer Art website (which is even more unloved than Forgeworld as the Warhammer Art is never marketed or anything); but the prices are high and the range limited.
OF course better would be printed books, but I think Warhammer+ could at least show off a lot more concept work and such.
I wished for a conversion gallery where you can compare the scale of different miniatures. 'Does this tree revenant arm matches the size of this a wraithguard body?' 'How large is a Deredo dread compared to a Redemptor?', etc. Easy to implement with existing content but of great use to me.
GW is starting to lose me. I think I will unsubscribe soon and just buy the pineapples fig from ebay.
It's probably just me but I dont really think GW's content cuts it for me outside of the miniature games. Guess my age and the intended target age for GW (10-15 yrs?) have something to do with it...? Being involved in the hobby in one form or another since the early 90's, this stuff is just too basic for my sensibilities.
tauist wrote: GW is starting to lose me. I think I will unsubscribe soon and just buy the pineapples fig from ebay.
It's probably just me but I dont really think GW's content cuts it for me outside of the miniature games. Guess my age and the intended target age for GW (10-15 yrs?) have something to do with it...? Being involved in the hobby in one form or another since the early 90's, this stuff is just too basic for my sensibilities.
EDIT: Unsubscribed. Feel better already
You at least give it a go, maybe it will bet better in a year or so.
I would suggest feed backing the reason you unsubscribed, that may turn out useful for their service.
I cant comment on the W+ content I haven't seen it but what I have seen on twitch the extremely boring "everything is awesome!!!" attitude. Lets just say I cant watch it more than a couple minutes before disconnecting.
Glad the release was not global, I do not mind dropping the money for the sniper and then some more for the megaboss when I can grab them where I live, but right now the content is just enough to fill up a Mega folder.
I cant comment on the W+ content I haven't seen it but what I have seen on twitch the extremely boring "everything is awesome!!!" attitude. Lets just say I cant watch it more than a couple minutes before disconnecting.
If you're talking about their Hobby Hangout and/or Preview streams, I don't know what you were expecting? They're both done by GW employees and are barely disguised marketing and advertising. Were you hoping for discussion about how much the presenters dislike the new releases, or talk about how the prices are too high? Of course the Twitch streams are going to have an "everything is awesome, this (GW)hobby is amazing!" attitude.
I cant comment on the W+ content I haven't seen it but what I have seen on twitch the extremely boring "everything is awesome!!!" attitude. Lets just say I cant watch it more than a couple minutes before disconnecting.
They're both done by GW employees and are barely disguised marketing and advertising.
You could call literally everything GW puts out that. And you wouldn't be wrong in any case.
I mean there's nothing wrong with enjoying something. Some youtube channels even manage to like GW releases without diving down into a long rant about prices every single time something is released
shadowsfm wrote: the 5th episode of angels of death was amazing. why isn't this the first episode?
Because then we wouldn’t have the flashback episode?
Surely you mean to say the random and out of the blue flashback episode?
Not that I have a problem with anything the episode actually shows, but...
Spoiler:
... it's an unconnected info dump whose timing seems to be entirely motivated by keeping up fake mystery about the captain's status throughout earlier episodes. There is no narrative build up to the actual content of the flashback that ties in with the here and now shown in the previous episodes. It just happens because the mystery is solved in the previous episode and now that there's no risk of giving away the Genestealer Cult surprise they can happily indulge in all the Terminator action they didn't get to show earlier (#bolterporn4life). They also use the opportunity to give us, the audience, the lowdown on the Servitor hook, without any of that being revealed to the protagonist. Which is basically the opposite of what the rest of the episode is about, and will require needless repetition down the line so Deathwatch Boy gets to know, too, and pick up the quest from where the captain left off.
It's fun in isolation, yeah. But the storytelling structure is pretty dodgy in my opinion.
I cant comment on the W+ content I haven't seen it but what I have seen on twitch the extremely boring "everything is awesome!!!" attitude. Lets just say I cant watch it more than a couple minutes before disconnecting.
If you're talking about their Hobby Hangout and/or Preview streams, I don't know what you were expecting? They're both done by GW employees and are barely disguised marketing and advertising. Were you hoping for discussion about how much the presenters dislike the new releases, or talk about how the prices are too high? Of course the Twitch streams are going to have an "everything is awesome, this (GW)hobby is amazing!" attitude.
There's a middle ground between criticising your own product (which nobody could reasonably expect) and a "this is AWESOME!!!11!!1!" attitude. Other companies manage to find that middle ground and provide interesting, informative content without going overboard. I suspect that's what NAVARRO would prefer as it's also the approach I prefer.
Just to add my two cents with regards to the battlereports:
I love the TT tactics crowds and always have a bit of a watch pf the batreps, but seldomly really follpw them closely, its always difficult for me, to follow at some point. So at some point I phase out. Cant really tell you any result of a batrep. Same with other channels (except play on). But I found the GW batreps really entertaining and they drew me in, to the point I actually followed the battle. So I really like their presentation and the format.
shadowsfm wrote: the 5th episode of angels of death was amazing. why isn't this the first episode?
Because then we wouldn’t have the flashback episode?
Surely you mean to say the random and out of the blue flashback episode?
Not that I have a problem with anything the episode actually shows, but...
Spoiler:
... it's an unconnected info dump whose timing seems to be entirely motivated by keeping up fake mystery about the captain's status throughout earlier episodes. There is no narrative build up to the actual content of the flashback that ties in with the here and now shown in the previous episodes. It just happens because the mystery is solved in the previous episode and now that there's no risk of giving away the Genestealer Cult surprise they can happily indulge in all the Terminator action they didn't get to show earlier (#bolterporn4life). They also use the opportunity to give us, the audience, the lowdown on the Servitor hook, without any of that being revealed to the protagonist. Which is basically the opposite of what the rest of the episode is about, and will require needless repetition down the line so Deathwatch Boy gets to know, too, and pick up the quest from where the captain left off.
It's fun in isolation, yeah. But the storytelling structure is pretty dodgy in my opinion.
Let's judge the storytelling aspect of that...when the actual story comes out, yea?
I'm just wondering when they're going to wake Ignis up. I mean, why all the foreshadowing if you're never going to see him waddle into combat - the angriest washing machine!
And we did get a very chipper Tech-Priestess out of this one, so that was nice.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm just wondering when they're going to wake Ignis up. I mean, why all the foreshadowing if you're never going to see him waddle into combat - the angriest washing machine!
Don't rush the elderly! He'll be there in his own time.
I cant comment on the W+ content I haven't seen it but what I have seen on twitch the extremely boring "everything is awesome!!!" attitude. Lets just say I cant watch it more than a couple minutes before disconnecting.
If you're talking about their Hobby Hangout and/or Preview streams, I don't know what you were expecting? They're both done by GW employees and are barely disguised marketing and advertising. Were you hoping for discussion about how much the presenters dislike the new releases, or talk about how the prices are too high? Of course the Twitch streams are going to have an "everything is awesome, this (GW)hobby is amazing!" attitude.
There's a middle ground between criticising your own product (which nobody could reasonably expect) and a "this is AWESOME!!!11!!1!" attitude. Other companies manage to find that middle ground and provide interesting, informative content without going overboard. I suspect that's what NAVARRO would prefer as it's also the approach I prefer.
Yes that was what I meant. I prefer the informative content rather than the shallow ( best thing ever) every couple minutes.
So what do I expect from a stream that is all about delivering content? Enjoyable content, not an amateur at best relentless sales pitch.
I hope that W+ is much better than what we see on streams though, but I dont know.
The world is not all polarised like that, not everything is awesome or everything is horrible... you know middle ground.
As for Mr Grey the - its an GW employee thats expected...
Well good Sir every GW employee is an individual first and I have had the pleasure to meet several GW store managers on their stores with the instructions to sell things to me... Yes a few were the brainless- THIS IS AWESOME! but in my experience the Majority of the GW employees are polite and not brainless or unable to talk and give middle ground opinions and advices regarding products and even miniatures overall... The later gets my business.
I would suggest not painting everyone with such wide brush though.
All GW streams and videos include an armed gunman just outside the frame that's going to execute the employee on the spot if they fail to upholds the company standard of BestThingEver/Minute.
Geifer wrote: Why? Did I just imagine the first four episodes?
Kids these days just want entire series at once. Idea of having to wait a bit is alien for them.
Probably because that's how most television series relased on streaming services worked, they had their entire seasons relased all at ones? The Boys, Stranger Things, Lost in Space, The Witcher, Love Death + Robots, The Man In High Castle, just to name a few. And streaming services is like, y'know, the thing GW is trying to ape?
Geifer wrote: Why? Did I just imagine the first four episodes?
Kids these days just want entire series at once. Idea of having to wait a bit is alien for them.
Probably because that's how most television series relased on streaming services worked, they had their entire seasons relased all at ones? The Boys, Stranger Things, Lost in Space, The Witcher, Love Death + Robots, The Man In High Castle, just to name a few. And streaming services is like, y'know, the thing GW is trying to ape?
Well, except The Boys, that one was released weekly, save for the first couple eps.
Geifer wrote: Why? Did I just imagine the first four episodes?
Kids these days just want entire series at once. Idea of having to wait a bit is alien for them.
Probably because that's how most television series relased on streaming services worked, they had their entire seasons relased all at ones? The Boys, Stranger Things, Lost in Space, The Witcher, Love Death + Robots, The Man In High Castle, just to name a few. And streaming services is like, y'know, the thing GW is trying to ape?
Well, except The Boys, that one was released weekly, save for the first couple eps.
The entire first season was relased in one day, as well as half the second one.
Geifer wrote: Why? Did I just imagine the first four episodes?
Kids these days just want entire series at once. Idea of having to wait a bit is alien for them.
Probably because that's how most television series relased on streaming services worked, they had their entire seasons relased all at ones? The Boys, Stranger Things, Lost in Space, The Witcher, Love Death + Robots, The Man In High Castle, just to name a few. And streaming services is like, y'know, the thing GW is trying to ape?
Well, except The Boys, that one was released weekly, save for the first couple eps.
The entire first season was relased in one day, as well as half the second one.
The first season was not released in one day, at least here in Spain. I watched it on release dates. Same with the second one.
Anyways, moot point ^^. Netflix popularized the release binge quite a while ago, although it's true that lately some companies have decided to revert back to weekly release to generate more hype. Disney+ and HBO would be the most prominents, but I think Apple TV also does it.
Geifer wrote: Why? Did I just imagine the first four episodes?
Kids these days just want entire series at once. Idea of having to wait a bit is alien for them.
Adults, on the other hand, are completely patient and no demand for faster/instant release schedules ever comes from anyone over 18. Similarly, kids of previous generations were also patient and never expressed any desire to not wait for something they wanted. It's really just kids from this current time period exactly who want things fast.
When I upgraded my app's subscription to the full Warhammer+ sub it just worked for me. I couldn't actually make a Warhammer+ subscription except through upgrading my app.
Rihgu wrote: When I upgraded my app's subscription to the full Warhammer+ sub it just worked for me. I couldn't actually make a Warhammer+ subscription except through upgrading my app.
Did you buy your Warhammer+ subscription through the app then? That's what, $60 so you have to buy it twice. : /
eldomtom2 wrote: First week without an animation. Not a great sign.
Proper poor effort imo, why big up the service on animation when there's hardly any to show, if it was'nt for that mini i would have have cancelled, £50 through W+ is going to be a lot cheaper than what the scalping scum will be charging for it!
I'll go as far as saying, after being available for just over a month, it is actually unacceptable that already they are struggling to do at least one episode of animation a week.
And as much as some people defend the service for the other parts of the product, it was advertised as if the animation would be the premier and main product.
The Vindicare and voucher is not worth it, going to unsubscribe now.
EDIT: The process of unsubscribing is a bit desperate (on the platforms part), you get asked 3x if you are sure you want to cancel and have the exclusive model thrust onto the screen....
I'd say it's both. Which really is a shame. I really loved the idea of Warhammer animation and I really wanted to like the service, but honestly there's a ton wrong with it. I left a boatload of very constructive feedback during the recent survey in the hope of helping the service become something that is actually good quality.
Now there's a week of (to me) zero content after they are already drip feeding as slow as possible. I'd have stuck with it even at a single measley episode a week, but GW can't even do that. It's a cancel from me.
Well... so far Saturday mornings have been a break from work. Playing some pc games and then watching Angels of Death.
I'd really started to like that show. It didn't seem like it ended... did it? I'm rather peeved that the only thing I've found worthwhile on Warhammer+ seems to have ended. Meh.
Gimgamgoo wrote: Well... so far Saturday mornings have been a break from work. Playing some pc games and then watching Angels of Death.
I'd really started to like that show. It didn't seem like it ended... did it? I'm rather peeved that the only thing I've found worthwhile on Warhammer+ seems to have ended. Meh.
Another 5 episodes to come. Just a shame the next isn’t coming this week.
I liked the offering thus far, but now even my boundaries are reached. No Hammer & Bolter since launch was a bummer, but no animation at all makes me wonder if the service was a still birth all along. I am subscribed for the year, so GW has time to improve the service, but my patience is spent. If I were on a monthly subscription, I would cancel now.
To say it with Tolkien: The content feels thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I strongly suspect they originally planned to have more ready by now but it was disrupted by the pandemic.
The pandemic was a year and a half ago. By now, most media companies have adapted for a loooooong time. In the field of animation and game devs, to be precise, the slump was a period of 4-5 months. It's not really an excuse at this stage.
Gimgamgoo wrote: Well... so far Saturday mornings have been a break from work. Playing some pc games and then watching Angels of Death.
I'd really started to like that show. It didn't seem like it ended... did it? I'm rather peeved that the only thing I've found worthwhile on Warhammer+ seems to have ended. Meh.
Another 5 episodes to come. Just a shame the next isn’t coming this week.
5 to go? Cool. You've just cheered me up. Hopefully it gets back to a weekly schedule after this 'break'. :-)
Rihgu wrote: When I upgraded my app's subscription to the full Warhammer+ sub it just worked for me. I couldn't actually make a Warhammer+ subscription except through upgrading my app.
Did you buy your Warhammer+ subscription through the app then? That's what, $60 so you have to buy it twice. : /
Buy what twice? I was paying for the Warhammer App, and then Warhammer+ came out, so I went into my iPhone's app subscription settings and flipped "upgrade to Warhammer+".
I wasn't charged twice, didn't buy anything twice, it just took upgraded the subscription.
Rihgu wrote: When I upgraded my app's subscription to the full Warhammer+ sub it just worked for me. I couldn't actually make a Warhammer+ subscription except through upgrading my app.
Did you buy your Warhammer+ subscription through the app then? That's what, $60 so you have to buy it twice. : /
Buy what twice? I was paying for the Warhammer App, and then Warhammer+ came out, so I went into my iPhone's app subscription settings and flipped "upgrade to Warhammer+".
I wasn't charged twice, didn't buy anything twice, it just took upgraded the subscription.
Without looking back at other posts, I believe others have stated that they even had a refund on a Warhammer App payment once upgrading to +.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I strongly suspect they originally planned to have more ready by now but it was disrupted by the pandemic.
The pandemic was a year and a half ago. By now, most media companies have adapted for a loooooong time. In the field of animation and game devs, to be precise, the slump was a period of 4-5 months. It's not really an excuse at this stage.
I'm certainly not defending them, just expressing that I feel things are not going as they had originally planned. I still don't support the way they have handled it.
At any rate the pandemic is an ongoing thing, not some 'one and done' a year and a half ago where everyone adapted then went straight back to production as usual.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I strongly suspect they originally planned to have more ready by now but it was disrupted by the pandemic.
The pandemic was a year and a half ago. By now, most media companies have adapted for a loooooong time. In the field of animation and game devs, to be precise, the slump was a period of 4-5 months. It's not really an excuse at this stage.
I'm certainly not defending them, just expressing that I feel things are not going as they had originally planned. I still don't support the way they have handled it.
At any rate the pandemic is an ongoing thing, not some 'one and done' a year and a half ago where everyone adapted then went straight back to production as usual.
I personally believe they became ultra twitchy in regards to the amount of investment being made, mainly in the animations and not taking any income for it and have launched far too early.
January or even next summer once they have multiple products finished that would fill allow for at least one episode of animation a week.
Ah well, I think they may have shot themselves in the foot as I think many monthly subscribers will unsubscribe now, and I will pick it up for a month summer/christmas 2022 for a decent binge whilst off work.
The "free" (lol) models are doing most of the lifting at this point. It probably bought them a year, GW's customers love them an "exclusive" model even if they didn't know they needed it till they were told it was exclusive.
A beer is £4.20 round my way. That’ll last me perhaps 20 minutes, and I get nothing to show for it. That price can go up depending on what you’re drinking, and whereabouts you are. This is why I don’t go drinking in London.
A cinema ticket is £12.00 or so. That’s what, 1.5 to 3 hours of entertainment in a format I can’t immediately rewatch.
I paid £55 for a Shocktoberfest ticket. That’s a good three or four hours, but again not something I can revisit on a whim.
Food wise I can do a couple of decent burgers with £5, more or less.
Sorry, I understand animations are out of GW control since its a third party that does that but why this service did not start with:
A package with Dozens of painting tutorials, Battle reports, lore articles etc? Why 1 per week? Seems to me like GW did not invest themselves in developing content since this is something they have total control.
This is pure speculation of course, but I believe it's because some suit went "people seem to love subscriptions, why don't we have a subscription, Royston?" followed by frantic activity of some poor employees who now had to scramble to prepare or acquire content for the service that was supposed to launch ASAP. The whole thing feels undercooked.
It certainly feels that if there's no original animations it would be a good opportunity to wow people with something more interesting for the vault. Why not put the original Realms of Chaos books up or something?
Because that'd limit profits from selling that thing if/when they reprint it. If it can make a decent profit on it's own, it's no going to be part of this service.
NAVARRO wrote: Sorry, I understand animations are out of GW control since its a third party that does that but why this service did not start with:
A package with Dozens of painting tutorials, Battle reports, lore articles etc? Why 1 per week? Seems to me like GW did not invest themselves in developing content since this is something they have total control.
Not to sound funny, but in that case you understand more than GW seems to do. This week's gap doesn't make GW look good no matter what else they might have thrown in (not that they did, but, you know). They either thought a week without animation was fine, which would point to a terrible lack of understanding their customers, or they thought producing enough in advance was not necessary because they expected everything to work flawlessly and they'd produce enough on time for one episode per week, which would be reckless and unrealistic.
I've been wondering if and when this was going to happen. Having a good laugh right now, too.
Next fun thing thing to see: Do they just button down and wait for it to blow over, or do they recognize their blunder and implement improvements (not that those would happen quickly)?
).
Settles it for me, I won't even test it in that case.
