Ok, this is not a question but rather some analysis.

On many boards people claim that White Dwarf is now rubbish and often remember when it so much better, contained less adverts, was kind to its mum and came with a flexidisk every month.

The thing is this "five years" is always stated, it was last year, the year before that and so on. This must mean that this heyday half a decade ago has more to do with nostalgia than the quality of the mag. This kind of subjective memory dressed up a definite fact gets on my nerves so I did some analysis. I took three copies of white dwarf from last year (Oct, Nov & Dec), three from 2010 (366, 365, 364), and three from 2007 (331, 330, 329) and when through them and categorised each page based on a series of criteria.

This should give some substance to the "WD is poo these days" arguments.

Ok here are the categories:
Product Description: Shows a fully painted/complete product with a description of background but no rule details other than names, no stats or points costs
Model Showcase: Shows an example of a product as an example of painting and/or modeling. Includes 'Evay Metal, readers armies, golden demon etc. Does not show step by step guides or paint names. Not enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it
[b]Gaming: An article about tactics, a battle report, rules etc. If rules and/or point costs are included it’s a gaming article.
Modelling/Painting: Shows step by step guides and/or paint names. enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it, may be a detailed parts listing of a box.
Advert: Has a price or a product code in it.
Opinion: Usually standard bearer or similar. Does not include editorials.
Event: An article about an event, either upcoming or past. It can be very similar to an advert.
Store Listing: The store listing, store openings and other gumph that appears in that section of the mag.
Previews: Shows a green or details about a product without a release date

And the results:



So the new WD has more model show cases, less adverts, less gaming, and more descriptions than 5 years ago and about the same painting and modelling but event coverage has vanished, it costs a quid more in real terms.

WD sucked hard 5 years ago as well.

It's been horrible ever since the giant issue of 314, which is prior to your dataset. Go back to issues 300 and prior if you want examples of a good magazine.

Also you're not taking into account quality. There used to be a *lot* more wordcount and a *lot* less whitespace. Battle reports are prime examples, they used to have a really detailed report with proper unit-by-unit breakdowns and maps for each turns and snippets of background to provide a narrative. These days it's a bunch of 2-page images with a few paragraphs floating around the corners. Massive images everywhere, massively giant fonts, massive amounts of whitespace, complete lack of actual words or any substance to the words that are in there is what has made it low quality, not the relative ratios of "this to that".

The adverts have never been the problem, WD has been loaded with ads for as long as I can remember. The quality of the content is the thing that has gone downhill. I used to be able to spend several evenings reading a WD since it was crammed full of text and really interesting stuff. Now it's barely good for half an hour.

Yeah WD has always had a gak load of adverts (being their hobby and catalogue rolled in one). You could forgive them in the past for having detailed articles about this and that. But WD has always been a glorified catalogue.

 scarletsquig wrote:
WD sucked hard 5 years ago as well.

Go back to issues 300 and prior if you want examples of a good magazine.

I may do what I can find a big bag of round-to-it or fill up my barrel of bother. Any analysis is as good as the dataset.

 scarletsquig wrote:


Also you're not taking into account quality.

That is deliberate as quality is very subjective. Word count could be seen a proxy for quality but requires more effort to collect the data and is, I feel, no better a proxy than page count when the effort required is taken in to account.

 scarletsquig wrote:

The adverts have never been the problem, WD has been loaded with ads for as long as I can remember. The quality of the content is the thing that has gone downhill. I used to be able to spend several evenings reading a WD since it was crammed full of text and really interesting stuff. Now it's barely good for half an hour.

Often it is the perceived increase in adverts that is cited as being an indicator of how rubbish this mag is compared to that which I why I included it in the dataset. As I said in the OP I'm trying to provide some actual data to the arguments.

Personally I agree with you, the quality of the written words has dropped. However people still debate the quality based upon other factors which are usually based on no hard facts.

I'd point out that the dataset does actually support a "pics over words" hypothesis when you compare the amount of model showcases vs gaming articles between the 2012 mags and the 2007 mags. Although this does not tell us anything about the quality of the gaming articles it does show a trend towards pics over words. The increase in product descriptions would also be an indicator of a drop in quality, as I perceive quality.

However some people may actually like the show cases and descriptions, leading them to think the quality has risen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Yeah WD has always had a gak load of adverts (being their hobby and catalogue rolled in one). You could forgive them in the past for having detailed articles about this and that. But WD has always been a glorified catalogue.

Yes it has and the data backs this up, although the percentage of page count the figures are (if one takes a product description to be the same as an advert, I certainly do) show the new WDs are particularly "bad" for it:
"Date" "Percentage of page count" "part of cover price"
01/12/2012 40.3% £2.22
01/11/2012 41.9% £2.31
01/10/2012 42.8% £2.35
01/06/2010 26.7% £1.26
01/05/2010 37.5% £1.77
01/04/2010 21.7% £1.02
01/07/2007 27.3% £1.24
01/06/2007 39.8% £1.80
01/05/2007 25.8% £1.17

WD really went down hill after Paul Sawyer left (2005?) but the seeds of rot were already present for quite some time before that.

I would compare modern WDs with those from 10 years ago as the WDs from 5 years ago were awful.

It was rubbish 5 years ago, it's been poor a long time. My dad bought it from around #110-150, and I started buying regularly from #200-260, and even then the quality wasn't the same but was still decent reading. Into the late #200s I only bought occasionally and my last issue was #300 because I'm a sucker for anniversaries. I quit buying when it went up to £4 and I felt it wasn't worth it, flicking through in the newsagents is enough for me to prove this ever since. It's probably the worst of the modelling/wargaming hobby magazines still in print.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
It's probably the worst of the modelling/wargaming hobby magazines still in print.

Sadly true,its probably the most expensive as well.

WD wasn't better 5 years ago.

I stopped buying before we hit #220.

Palindrome wrote:WD really went down hill after Paul Sawyer left (2005?) but the seeds of rot were already present for quite some time before that.

I would compare modern WDs with those from 10 years ago as the WDs from 5 years ago were awful.

I think I have some from back then. When I can get round to it I'll extend the dataset.

Howard A Treesong wrote:It was rubbish 5 years ago, it's been poor a long time. My dad bought it from around #110-150, and I started buying regularly from #200-260, and even then the quality wasn't the same but was still decent reading. Into the late #200s I only bought occasionally and my last issue was #300 because I'm a sucker for anniversaries. I quit buying when it went up to £4 and I felt it wasn't worth it, flicking through in the newsagents is enough for me to prove this ever since. It's probably the worst of the modelling/wargaming hobby magazines still in print.

This is a comparison between white dwarfs, not an assessment of if they are rubbish or not. Think "this white dwarf is has more adverts than that one, I think that makes it worse". If you think that all white dwarfs since X edition are rubbish, what objectively is it about the mag that got worse/changed?

H.B.M.C. wrote:WD wasn't better 5 years ago.

I stopped buying before we hit #220.

So you think they have stayed the same or got better? If you think that all white dwarfs since 220 edition are rubbish, what objectively is it about the mag that got worse/changed?

A lot more adverts, a lot more articles being bland, devoid of content and mostly an advert anyway with reduced word count. Little in the way of new and alternative rules and scenarios. Less individuality in display articles, for example a painting article now is typically just showing off the 'eavy metal stuff widely seen elsewhere, nothing of individual staff armies or those sent in by readers. No readers letters, no answers to correspondence, no previews of greens and future projects because of their 'secrecy', no articles on terrain and vehicle scratchbuilding with templates and new rules. Older issues had complex scenarios and details for things like Warhammer Roleplay or Space Hulk, which were chock full of text, new rules, pages to photocopy/cut out for new floor plans and counters.

When 40K was first growing you'd pick up an issue every month and find new rules for vehicles and modelling articles. Now there's just nothing creative about White Dwarf. The older issues you can read and re-read again and are a mine of useful articles for modelling and gaming scenarios. What exactly is White Dwarf now? It's padded out previews of their new models and some lacklustre battle reports and a huge wodge at the back, very similar each month, devoted to lists of their shops. Not only is the written quality less than it was, there's also a lot more white space last I looked, which is astounding given how padded it is with adverts. The real difference is, in years gone they wanted to support your hobby, now they want you to buy, and the magazine promotes only that.

Koppo wrote:
So you think they have stayed the same or got better? If you think that all white dwarfs since 220 edition are rubbish, what objectively is it about the mag that got worse/changed?

Not every issue since 220 has been rubbish. It would be foolish to claim that every issue since Issue #X has been bad, because not every issue is the same. There are peaks and troughs across every year, but the trend is downwards (ie. the bad issues are worse than the bad issues of a year before, and the good issues aren't as good as the previous good issues). The most recent crop since the "reboot" have been terrible - full of massive dark pictures with little text, and what text is there is just telling you what's in the picture. 50 pages of new releases and then articles talking about those new releases. It's a monstrous waste of money and resources for what essentially a giant catalogue of no real gaming/hobby value.

The reason I liked WD's is because of the Battle Reports. Rigged or not they told a fun story, and it was great seeing these armies fighting over the studio terrain. Around 220 something happened, and rather than turn-by-turn reports with detailed maps and interesting descriptions of what the players did each turn, we got a few iso-metric photographs of the table with a few arrows pointing to events with a line or two about it, a bit of an intro, and then a summation by each of the players. It was a few pages long. No detailed lists and reasons for why the players took what they took, no turn-by-turn information. Just intro, some photos, outtro. It took me a while to see it, but the WD's I was buying weren't the WD's I had started with. Even as far back as the oldest issue I own (100 something, the one with the first ever 40K BatRep, back during 1st Ed 40K, Blood Anges vs Eldar). That had turn-by-turn descriptions and maps and all sorts of things. As soon as that went, I lost interest.

Now that format returned over the years - I remember City Fight gave us a Bat Rep like that, and I think when the Trial Assault Rules in 3rd Ed came out we got a good BatRep between Pete Haine's Iron Warriors and someone else - but it's never been consistent. Now we don't even get the articles we used to get. A terrain building article where they show us a massive crashed shuttle, and what it's made from and so on is replaced by how they kit bashed a bunch of GW plastic terrain kits to make something. Every battle - almost every photograph - takes place on a Realm of Battle Board. Painting guids show pictures of all their Specially™ Branded™ New™ Paints™ And™ The™ Order™ You™ Use™ Them™ In™. It's worthless.

And, worse, it's soulless.

I think the new WD looks great but has no real substance. The painting guides are ok but you need the painting books to understand the terms and really apply it right. I bought every WD they published from the early 90's until a few years ago. The big difference is the lack of fluff and stories. I seem to remember short stories set in WFB and Chapter Approved. This was basically fluff updates and exploring 40k universe. The magazine supported the warhammer world and supplemented the story lines. That's what was cool about it.

Ok, I've added two from back in 2000, 246 and 247 (oldest ones I can put my hands on)

I first started buying at WD256, and I can STILL go back and re-read those first few issues I bought and enjoy them. 12 years later! For me the noticeable drop in quality, was after Paul Sawyer left, it seems a lot more clinical now, less friendly. It used to be real people and contributors sharing their hobby for the fun of it.

Same here; I have a stack of WD's from the low 100's through to late 100's/200's - that was when WD was at it's best I think. Go see some of HBMC/Kid Kyoto's retro WD reviews for evidence of the content.

I think for me the numbers in the dataset sum this up for me, the earliest two mags had 74 and 77 pages of stuff to use in or about gaming,by that I mean playing with toy soldiers, but the newest one have only about 17 pages that are about playing with toy soldiers.

As Howard A Treesong says, the white space difference is striking. Without actually measuring it putting any article side by side it's probably 4 to four times as much back in 2000.

If fact, I'll compare a battle report from this month's (Jan) WD with one from WD247 in raw column inches:

July 2000 WD 247 136 vertical column inches of text
Jan 2013 WD XXX 123 vertical column inches of text

But the font is different, you can fit roughly 13% more words in the same same space with the old text so the actual difference is:

July 2000 WD 247 153 vertical column inches of text
Jan 2013 WD XXX 123 vertical column inches of text

So the old bat rep was 25% bigger than the new one. It was also more fun to read, by 124.8% and a sheckel.

I started playing back in 2nd Edition 40K, and I remember the White Dwarf was much better then. Nearly every issue had card inserts that were used to make terrain, or they were extra data cards or counters for their games, and WD even had *gasp* rules in it back then.

 40kFSU wrote:
I think the new WD looks great but has no real substance. The painting guides are ok but you need the painting books to understand the terms and really apply it right. I bought every WD they published from the early 90's until a few years ago. The big difference is the lack of fluff and stories. I seem to remember short stories set in WFB and Chapter Approved. This was basically fluff updates and exploring 40k universe. The magazine supported the warhammer world and supplemented the story lines. That's what was cool about it.

I find myself in agreement with this. SOME of the painting guides are good, but it's nothing that you can't already find online, but other than that I feel like WD doesn't have much "meat" to it anymore. I don't even read the B-reps, because honestly, they don't even put out good b-reps in WD. Ten years ago was around the time I actually stopped subscribing because the quality was decreasing. I really liked the short stories they had too, and the Chapter Approved stuff was really good. They used to put out Chapter Approved compilations too, which were basically thicker-than-codex updates to the game to add more content (like the Vehicle Design Rules, Sisters of Battle I believe?). Those were cool.

The stuff that came with White Dwarf used to be far more interesting too. Codex: Assassins, the very first Necron Warrior, cardstock buildings, I believe there was a cool Wargear supplement that was later expanded on and released as Codex: Wargear too? Nowadays, we get...fold-out posters. Yay.

Well the WD was better summer 2011-summer 2012, when they tried to get actual content back into the magazine. Downside was that essential rules and even a complete WD Codex were made limited edition.

Remember when WD featured cardboard terrain or a multipage background text on Kroot with legal mercenary list? That's what a WD can be in the hands of a capable team.

And I don't believe that the presentation/list of GW stores was always as excessive as now, with 10 pages list plus 2-6 pages store presentation.

White dwarf used to be a great gaming mag back when i used to buy it - some time back in the 80's. It wasn't just wahammer or even just GW stuff. Covered various RPGs as well as other stuff.

I had a look at my new White Dwarf the other day. 4 issues into the new format now and enough time for them to deliver on all their promises.

Now i quite like the new Dwarf, it looks slick and actually like a high quality magazine. However looking at the actual content although the page count has gone up by 40 pages or so its all taken by their lavish promotion of the new releases.

Old WD new Releases: 12 pages
New WD releases: 50! Pages (essentially adverts with quite frankly embarrassing trumpet blowing)

Now some of the other content is quite good and i will actually read it but overall the content quantitiy is far below what i would expect for a 5.50 magazine. This month was slightly better than most with the GD entries but on the whole its all style and little substance. I think my favourite bit of the magazine is actually the bit in the back after the store list.

Im a subscriber (for my sins) so i dont mind at the moments as my subscription hasnt gone up so im not paying anymore, but as soon as it increases i think ill be at the jumping off point.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and Fat Bloke Dwarf ruled. 'Nuff said

My first ever WD was issue 120, which was, to my mind, smack in the middle of a golden age. I picked up a lot of back issues, as far back as issue 27, and a few in the 50s. I have a lot from 80-100 and most from 100-120. I would say the golden age was the late 90s to the early 150s. I still read some of those ones every so often as they had some cracking Rogue Trader stuff in, good Epic stuff, cool Space Hulk scenarios, interesting conversions... The battle reports of that era actually made sense and could actually give you ideas of tactics for your own games, especially the WFB battle reports.

Yeah, I second the praise for 2nd Ed era stuff with free buildings, but even older than that was amazing. I picked up a loads of reeeeally old back issues, with Gobsmasha and Baneblade templates in, that kind of thing... proper hobby stuff, not just sales.

Edit: oh, yeah, and Necromunda stuff was drip-fed in WD and was ace. They NEED to bring back Necromunda, it's literally their best game ever. Yes, even better than Space Hulk, I went there...

Did you catch the Confrontation stuff they put in WD?

I remember all those buildings and cards. Does anyone else recall histories of some of the traitor legions? Back when epic was in production? I also remember stories about Felix and Gotreck. Also short stories that coincided with army book and codex releases.

I still have the original metal gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior from the WD releases. Yes, they used to include one preview model with your WD.

What issue are we up to now?

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
When 40K was first growing you'd pick up an issue every month and find new rules for vehicles and modelling articles. Now there's just nothing creative about White Dwarf. The older issues you can read and re-read again and are a mine of useful articles for modelling and gaming scenarios. What exactly is White Dwarf now? It's padded out previews of their new models and some lacklustre battle reports and a huge wodge at the back, very similar each month, devoted to lists of their shops. Not only is the written quality less than it was, there's also a lot more white space last I looked, which is astounding given how padded it is with adverts. The real difference is, in years gone they wanted to support your hobby, now they want you to buy, and the magazine promotes only that.

This pretty much sums up my position. I'm open to arguments that perhaps I've simply become more cynical in my 30s while simultaneously I was more impressionable as a teenager in the 90s. Perhaps my preference for earlier issues is, boiled down, more nostalgia for the years when all I did was hang out and game with my friends. While all that may be true, I can still definitely say that WD has become so poor that I have no intention of ever buying it in the foreseeable future (especially at current prices). I'll admit that I bought the first 're-vamped' issue out of curiosity but haven't even skimmed through one since.

 scarletsquig wrote:
WD sucked hard 5 years ago as well.

It's been horrible ever since the giant issue of 314, which is prior to your dataset. Go back to issues 300 and prior if you want examples of a good magazine.

Also you're not taking into account quality. There used to be a *lot* more wordcount and a *lot* less whitespace. Battle reports are prime examples, they used to have a really detailed report with proper unit-by-unit breakdowns and maps for each turns and snippets of background to provide a narrative. These days it's a bunch of 2-page images with a few paragraphs floating around the corners. Massive images everywhere, massively giant fonts, massive amounts of whitespace, complete lack of actual words or any substance to the words that are in there is what has made it low quality, not the relative ratios of "this to that".

The adverts have never been the problem, WD has been loaded with ads for as long as I can remember. The quality of the content is the thing that has gone downhill. I used to be able to spend several evenings reading a WD since it was crammed full of text and really interesting stuff. Now it's barely good for half an hour.

Couldn't agree with this more - I think generally around 310 or so is regarded as the benchmark, with the magazine moving downhill fairly rapidly after that.

Certainly, it has been poor for a lot longer than 5 years.

White Dwarf issues up to #300 were far and above better than they are now.

-Full mini-boardgames like Brewhouse Bash and Dark Eldar pit-fighting, and expansions to Warhammer Quest and Blood Bowl being included freely.

-punch-out cardstock terrain

-some rare issues came bagged with promo models. Like the issue about Assault on Black Reach (though that was after issue 300 if I remember right) coming with a free Nob and a Terminator.

-a much more friendly writing style, with Tale of Four gamers, fan-letters, Chapter Approved articles for zany things(Kroot Merc and Feral Ork armies!!), etc.

-Used to be terrain articles didn't just act as sales articles telling you to buy four of a given GW terrain kit. They told you alternate sources to get materials, and how to use such materials. Sometimes even templates to make buildings from.

-Kill Team and the "40K in 40 minutes" rules came from White Dwarf, as well as the VDR rules

Some of the things about what made it better a long time ago are a little subjective.

When I first started playing around 2009, I read a lot here about how "WD used to be great". I ordered a stack of old issues off of ebay. I'm at work so I can't provide exact issue numbers, but one of them had the Vehicle Design Rules and google tells me that was 251, and I recognize the cover, so I have about 10 issues in that range.

I don't have any nostalgia for this product because I had never read a single issue of it, ever, in any form, until they arrived. I don't have a FLGS so I never so much as flipped through one.

By my money, they were wildly better back then .One of them was some kind of Tyranid launch issue, and yes, it did focus on the new product, but it only showed the models for a few pages - 2 or 3, maybe. The rest of it was all kinds of stuff. I remember there was a short story (I've since read it elsewhere) about a tyranid invasion happening from the eyes of the IG on the ground (spoiler, they were eaten). There were about 3 pages showing you how to make terrain - I remember 2 separate pieces as being fascinating, one was making these weird alien columns out of pink foam and the tools you needed. The other was a bio-digestion pool made of styrofoam that they had sprayed with clear primer to partially melt it in an interesting way. In a different issue, they show you how to make a bunker out of cardboard, foam, and plaster that looked pretty good even by our standards, as well as how to make burnt trees out of lengths of floral wire and paper mache. One of the issues gave you rules for how to build any vehicle you wanted, and gave calculations and formulas for how to outfit them and point them out. Another was for the release of the Land Raider, and it was spread out over 2 issues - the first one spent a long time showing how the company actually built the tank (I mean, like, out of wood and stuff! - the one they used for the mold) and then walked you though how to assemble your own and primed it black. The next issue had about 6 pages picking it up from there and showing you a detailed walkthough of taking it from primed black into several different common chapters, along with (again) a pretty cool story about a Crimson Fist Land Raider that went on a total rampage, solo, after their monastery was destroyed and it got turned on. Pretty neat.

I wound up getting a single issue of WD from The Warstore on my next order. As chance would have it, the IG plastic kits for 5th were announced in this one. In the middle of the issue was the most fascinating scenario, where there is a group of IG stranded and waiting for a Valkyrie to come evacuate them. On turn 3 or so, they start rolling for the valk to arrive (it has to idle for a turn, and the rolls get easier, it's like a 6 on turn 3, 4 on turn 4, something like that). The whole while, Necrons roll 2d6 each turn and spawn more and more reinforcements. I was capitivated! What the hell are these guys talking about, these are awesome. I subscribed that day.

As it turns off, that was a total one-off issue. While I appreciated that my subscription was weirdly 15 issues instead of 12, the issues themselves were, by and large, crap. Mostly content free advertisements of the sort to which has been described ad nauseum. The only terrain "tutorials" I saw were defiling the imperial statues they sold for chaos (by adding more product) and making a tower of sorcery thing taller (by buying another tower of sorcery and stacking them together). All of the builds were of that sort, there were no scenarios or cool stuff. So far as special rules, instead of those super interesting vehicle design rules that were in a previous issue, there was only a partial Sisters codex that seemed very, very pared down. There were occasionally the short lore stories but they were much less common and a lot shorter, and as you posted earlier, in larger text. I was very, very disappointed and did not renew my subscription after it expired.

This Thanksgiving, I got a mondo bitz box from the Warstore. It wound up having a copy of the "new" WD, the Chaos one. It was the same as the others, generally devoid of content, and so forth as has been described here earlier.


TL;DR - the 2007 issues had an average of 14 pages of product description, the 2012 ones had an average of 54.6 while the magazine only added 10% more pages. That speaks for itself.

I think to an extent the problems with WD are 'self inflicted' - and no matter how good the journalists onboard, would still make very poor reading simply because of the extremely narrow parameters Games Workshop itself operates within these days.
- The 'Games' bit of the company name is a bit of a stretch in 2013, certainly compared to the 80's and 90's. We have 40k, WFB and LoTR now, and that's it. The writers from the era when the magazine was genuinely regarded as 'good' had a lot more material to go from; Necromunda, Mordheim, Epic, plus a slew of others. It was very easy for them to vary things up and keep it interesting.
- Absolutely nothing in the way of painting or terrain making. The prospect of a land speeder made from a deodarant bottle, or some kind of conversion plan for another plastic kit, is so unlikely that I would be less surprised if I opened WD to find an image of a mass of £50 notes wedged into Tom Kirby's bottom.
- A conscious understanding of how much GW costs these days. 'A tale of 4 gamers' without the expenditure list knocks the soul out of it.

 Ouze wrote:
Some of the things about what made it better a long time ago are a little subjective.
Snip ...

Great post, main thing i took from it?? ...... people don't use the word mondo enough anymore

 AegisGrimm wrote:

-some rare issues came bagged with promo models. Like the issue about Assault on Black Reach (though that was after issue 300 if I remember right) coming with a free Nob and a Terminator.

I have a metal Gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior. All released a bit before AoBR. The Necron came in 217 I think.

 Byte wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:

-some rare issues came bagged with promo models. Like the issue about Assault on Black Reach (though that was after issue 300 if I remember right) coming with a free Nob and a Terminator.

I have a metal Gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior. All released a bit before AoBR. The Necron came in 217 I think.

And lets not forget Aneur Sword of Twilight, when Mordheim was released. Think i've still got 2 or 3 of those around somewhere and i've painted 2.

Actually i think one of my favourite freebies from a WD was the battle tracker (issue 210 or 211?) it had undead on the front. It was a stoater!

Also the posters were great back then, cut away drawings of space marine vehicles and the like....

I forgot all the additional material for Specialist Games White Dwarf used to have.

And yeah, I remember how Tale of Four gamers gave them a set amount they could spend each session to expand their armies, and in each guy's article they usually gave tips on how they stretched that out by making conversions, or trading and the like.

The good White Dwarfs frankly, were from a time when GW was conscious that we all wanted to have tons of fun playing their games, and being part of a larger group doing it, rather than just consumers for their product. they honestly wanted us to have fun, and worked hard toward that goal..

 DiabolicAl wrote:

 Byte wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:

-some rare issues came bagged with promo models. Like the issue about Assault on Black Reach (though that was after issue 300 if I remember right) coming with a free Nob and a Terminator.

I have a metal Gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior. All released a bit before AoBR. The Necron came in 217 I think.

And lets not forget Aneur Sword of Twilight, when Mordheim was released. Think i've still got 2 or 3 of those around somewhere and i've painted 2.

Yup, I'll never forget mine. As some little scrote nicked it when having my intro game of Mordheim... Staff didn't replace it either.

 Pacific wrote:

- A conscious understanding of how much GW costs these days. 'A tale of 4 gamers' without the expenditure list knocks the soul out of it.

It makes it fake.

I still have my WDs with the original "A Tale of 4 Gamers." Really solid.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
White Dwarf issues up to #300 were far and above better than they are now.

-Full mini-boardgames like Brewhouse Bash and Dark Eldar pit-fighting, and expansions to Warhammer Quest and Blood Bowl being included freely.

-punch-out cardstock terrain

-some rare issues came bagged with promo models. Like the issue about Assault on Black Reach (though that was after issue 300 if I remember right) coming with a free Nob and a Terminator.

-a much more friendly writing style, with Tale of Four gamers, fan-letters, Chapter Approved articles for zany things(Kroot Merc and Feral Ork armies!!), etc.

-Used to be terrain articles didn't just act as sales articles telling you to buy four of a given GW terrain kit. They told you alternate sources to get materials, and how to use such materials. Sometimes even templates to make buildings from.

-Kill Team and the "40K in 40 minutes" rules came from White Dwarf, as well as the VDR rules

Agreed, White Dwarf 300 is by far my most favorite white dwarf to date. Mostly due to the campagin stuff and the movie marines, and everything else in it was just epic.

It went into making your own scenery, your own rules, your own scratch builds, adeptus custodes, every single thing you could want as a marine player to decrease cost on your marines. It actually had tips TO SAVE money for products. And good bundles like the razorback bundle (50$) including a tactical squad but with no sarge. (strangely)

White Dwarf and GW were better and cheaper back then, probably due to really bad management.

They don't really sell products as well. I past the gw store on fridays and saturdays only like five people even at their major events. Kinda sad really.

 Byte wrote:
I still have the original metal gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior from the WD releases. Yes, they used to include one preview model with your WD.

Metal Gargoyle? Sister of Battle?

I've got the metal Necron (still in his blister, as it happens)... but I don't remember the other two.

 scarletsquig wrote:
The quality of the content is the thing that has gone downhill. I used to be able to spend several evenings reading a WD since it was crammed full of text and really interesting stuff. Now it's barely good for half an hour.

Yeah, I have a few white dwarfs from back in the Gorkamorka days (15 years ago). You could read them for hours on end, so much more depth and more content.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Byte wrote:
I still have the original metal gargoyle, SoB, and Necron warrior from the WD releases. Yes, they used to include one preview model with your WD.

Metal Gargoyle? Sister of Battle?

I've got the metal Necron (still in his blister, as it happens)... but I don't remember the other two.

Maybe a US thing? Metal figures I recall were the Necrons and the Mordheim elf, there were done plastic like the dark eldar when 3rd ed was released, and a few cruder plastics when 2nd ed was out. When Sidters of Battle were first released in #212 we got a card model of a ruined shrine, the following issue have you a watch tower for gorkamorka, that was great.

Take of Four Gamers wouldn't be the same now, they were trying to demonstrate gaming on a reasonable budget. In one issue they went to the new year sales, which rather dates the articles now. They wouldn't put a cost break down on a similar article today because it wouldn't be a good advert for them as the horror of the full cost of their hobby is laid out.

I remember getting a plastic Berzerker when that first came out (not the current Berzerkers, the ones before the current kit). And I still have two plastic Brettonian Bowmen from when 5th Ed (I think) Warhammer Fantasy came out.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I forgot all the additional material for Specialist Games White Dwarf used to have.

And yeah, I remember how Tale of Four gamers gave them a set amount they could spend each session to expand their armies, and in each guy's article they usually gave tips on how they stretched that out by making conversions, or trading and the like.

The good White Dwarfs frankly, were from a time when GW was conscious that we all wanted to have tons of fun playing their games, and being part of a larger group doing it, rather than just consumers for their product. they honestly wanted us to have fun, and worked hard toward that goal..

Yeah those were good old days when its was fun first and money second. Now they are more like a terrible hybrid of Jehovah witnesses and sleazy car salesmen. They've become so dishonest over the years it isnt even funny at this point, and instead of fixing it they just say "meh you, pay me" as if we did something to anger them.
.

It definitely seemed better 5 years ago. I'm not quite sure if this is just the small part of 16 year old me looking back through rose tinted glasses or not. From my days of buying WD, my favourite issue is from around the time The Two Towers came out. It had Eomer on the front, but I didn't really care about the LotR stuff. Inside there was the coolest Slaanesh army in bronze and tan colours, with a unit of possessed based on famous horror characters, Jason, Freddie Kreuger, Hannibal Lector etc etc. I guess I just miss the days when they actually cared what their customers were doing, and seemed to take an interest. I mean, they don't even have a section you can write in anymore, do they?

Don't forget the issue that came with a free Codex: Assassins.

My Aenur is still serving proud as an Eldar Pathfinder.

 Kroothawk wrote:


And I don't believe that the presentation/list of GW stores was always as excessive as now, with 10 pages list plus 2-6 pages store presentation.

The thing is the data shows that store listing (and associated gumph) is not any larger than average for the period covered.

Mean average store list newest 3 = 13.7 pages
Mean average store list in 2010 = 18.3
Mean average store list in 2007 = 10.7
Mean average store list in 2000 = 8

Mean average for dataset = 13.1

It was much longer 2.5 years ago (but roughly a third more than in 2007) but represents the average over the last 12 years (ok that last statement may be a bit more than the sample would allow me to say, but sod it, if somebody wants to prove me wrong they can get the dataset)

I am not going to say it was 'better' but during 40k 3rd edition White Dwarf was 'relevant' because they were releasing official rules almost monthly in the magazine. So you often had to buy WD to get your rules. They did compile it all into Chapter Approved, but for a solid 2-3 years, every month was a new set of trial rules or official rules which made those magazines more required than normal.

When Chapter approved went away and rules stopped appearing in WD, so did the need for people to buy them. the only WDs I have bought recently were the ones with Ork units rules which I needed. (stompa VDR rules and ork Jets)

The peak of WD Imo was the Index Astartes period (~2001-2004). Perhaps that's just because I'm always a fluff-first guy though. GW was releasing new, important (key word here), dynamic, and interesting fluff on a monthly basis through the magazine.

One major problem that WD has in these threads is that it's been different things at different times. That makes it easy for people to agree that it's "not as good as it used to be." But people likely wouldn't agree about which era was best.

One thing no one has mentioned that at least applied in the US (not sure about other countries) is that your subscription not only got you a discounted price per issue but also gave you a $10 off coupon for bits orders over $25; I doubt I would have ever placed a bits order without that coupon and they hooked me in for additional orders every year beyond the one I got discounted.

It seemed like GW viewed the magazine a bit as a loss leader or at least not just a catalog excuse to collect money from the die hard fans. Cardboard terrain or other cool inserts like posters twice a year, occasional minis, intro games (like the cardboard BFG they had).. etc added actual objective physical value to what you got in addition to the extra percieved subjective value from new rules, terrain guides, and detailed battle reports.

WD has gone through several phases. I, being ancient, remember when it was a TRADE magazine, and covered non-GW products.

At some point (I do not know which issue) it became a purely in-house magazine that was designed to support GW. Loaded up with 'freebies' designed to support your gaming, and get you excited about the GW hobby. Free minis, free rules (which would make you want to buy the game), it was a showcase for Games Workshop, and it did it well.

The 'Fat Bloke' era was the slide into corporate hell. He tried, hard, to hold the magazine to the standards *HE* grew up with, but you can see the corporate pressure, as well as the ending of the "Loss Leader" attitude. The magazine had to slash costs. Less inserts. Less articles. More product display.

Finally, we reach the 'Relaunch' era. No issue numbers. Just "White Dwarf". Everything slick and shiny to attract the eye. 50% or more of the magazine is product advertising (and, yes, the "Painting" articles are nothing but product advertising). Articles are low-word-count-large-font 'teasers'. And the rejected articles are bound up and sold as a separate book (Campaign of Fire, anyone?).

What amuses me the most is that it does not have any appeal for the "Pure Hobbyist" or the "Pure Gamer". No terrain articles, no fluffy batreps, no tactical discussions, and no new rules. (Note: I'm aware that they're going to republish the rulesets from "Campaign of Fire" into WD. Doesn't count, becuase they've been published elsewhere, already and thusly not a compelling reason to buy WD.)

No, the current rag is purely a monthly product catalog.

But at least they're pimpin' Forge World now!

gorgon wrote:
One major problem that WD has in these threads is that it's been different things at different times. That makes it easy for people to agree that it's "not as good as it used to be." But people likely wouldn't agree about which era was best.

That's why I've attempted to put some objectivity in to the discussion. The content types give some indication of the "type" of magazine so that people can agree on/argue about the actual content make up rather than just say, for the umpteenth time "It was better five years ago, it was less of a advert...."

White Dwarf used to have huge amounts of fluff in it compared to now, little short stories usually about a particular battle, its been a while but if memory serves a few used to be a few pages long. I miss that.
The only fluff we get now is on the new releases explaining why the current FOTM is the best thing ever and you better go buy it next week.

The funny thing is that we've complained about WD not having rules in it. Then, when they do have rules, we complain and say that they shouldn't have put the rules in WD!

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
The funny thing is that we've complained about WD not having rules in it. Then, when they do have rules, we complain and say that they shouldn't have put the rules in WD!

When people complain about that aspect, they're complaining about how the issues sell out. If they know they're going to throw out the yearly bone with some cool new rules, they should significantly increase the print run for that issue and follow that up with either free downloads of the rules on the website and/or a timely compilation book. People don't complain that the rules are in WD... they're complaining that they can't get the rules due to apparently poor planning. I don't own any SOB but I would have considered buying the issues on the chance that I might in the future... but they sold out locally both months within a week (and before I could get to the store).

Fair point.

 Briancj wrote:
WD has gone through several phases. I, being ancient, remember when it was a TRADE magazine, and covered non-GW products.

I also am ancient, and used to buy the magazine as a kid in the 80s and teenager in the 90s. It had a huge variety of artices for other games and fantasy related stuff. (It introduced me to the Discworld novels with a special article and excerpts, and had D&D, Cthulhu, Paranoia etc.) They also had a lot of interesting stuff for the Warhammer world too obviously. Warhammer FRP adventures and extras for Fantasy Battle etc.
It was sad to see this disappear and it become focussed solely on GW products, but at least for a while they were creating interesting extras, supplemental material, short stories to add further depth to the gameworlds and extra little bits of fun to the games.

Unfortunately, as has been stated, when I pick it up now, it is just an extended product list with glossy pictures.
I would occasionally pick one up, but don't see the point now, as if I want to see the range of figures I can just browse the website.

Since doing this I've since read the last two dwarves and I think they are actually getting back to a mark where I enjoy reading it. The last issue contained both players armies as well as discussion about them and the techniques used.

The Bat rep used the player's own armies, the Golden daemon photography was, in my opinion, great.

I may, if I can be bothered redo my comparison with the most recent mags.

I bought one for the first time in a few years.

Basically a catalogue minimum creative writing or anything of interest

Admittedly I have bought I think all of the white dwarfs since the revamp but they don't last me anywhere near as long as they used to.

Back in the issue 180-300 era I think I pretty much bought every issue religiously (I used to have boxes full of them) but that was, imo, the golden era of the magazine.

A very small percentage of the magazine was devoted to new product advertising, with the remainder chock full of battle reports, terrain and conversion articles, fiction, new rules such as chapter approved and letters from readers.

This is how it should be imo. I do regret paying £5.50 a month for what is basically a glorified catalogue but I guess I am a sucker because of all the new codexes/army books they have brought out recently.

To me the highlight of a new release was the articles from the designers discussing the army and their thoughts during the design process. It was fascinating to read about how GW went about designing their armies and the play test process (back when they actually playtested new rules).

To be fair though, I do enjoy the fact that they have started using players own armies in some of the battle reports.

I would like to see a return to some of the good old days of WD with more descriptive battle reports (proper maps and turn by turn accounts would be nice) rather than just:

Turns 1-2 The Daemons move up a bit and get shot some
Turns 3 -4 The Daemons kill a few marines and get shot some more
Turns 5-6 More marines and daemons die and the plaguebearers sit on some objectives

The end

That is not a battle report worthy of the name to me.
We also need a lot more insight into the minds of the players and how they went about creating their army for the game rather than them just talking about how they want to show off the new stuff in the army that has just got a new codex.

One point that no-one has made - back in the day, even the adverts were enjoyable to me. WD magazine's ads were the main way of finding out what was available. I remember liking the ads almost as much as the features, just dreaming about how I was going to spend my pocket money. Nowadays, the main way to find out what products are available is the internet, and thus the adverts section of WD loses its relevancy. For some reason, they keep expanding this section of the magazine. I wonder if the people behind that decision are "old school" folks who don't realise that the majority of people reading the magazine these days are probably so computer-literate that the ads are completely irrelevant to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rohansoldier wrote:


Turns 1-2 The Daemons move up a bit and get shot some
Turns 3 -4 The Daemons kill a few marines and get shot some more
Turns 5-6 More marines and daemons die and the plaguebearers sit on some objectives

The end

Cool report bra' - where can I buy some plaguebearers?

I remember when White Dwarf was a thin little magazine, with mostly black & White pages... with rules and scenarios for:
Dungeons & Dragons
Call of Cthulhu (some great scenarios!)
Paranoia
RuneQuest....
Traveller (and a comic to go with it!)
And Monster Mark, for the win! (Yeah, I used to have issue #1....)

What I consider the best issues... may differ from those that like Warhammer (not around yet) or 40K (orks and dwarfs in space? Nah... can't be....)

The Auld Grump

 Fifty wrote:
I wonder if the people behind that decision are "old school" folks who don't realise that the majority of people reading the magazine these days are probably so computer-literate that the ads are completely irrelevant to them.

I'm pretty sure the people behind GW these days assume their customer base is either completely computer illiterate or simply stupid. Exhibit A: Closing down 3rd party online stores. Exhibit B: Their "one click" bundles on their website that assume people are too stupid to construct their own cart.

5 years No
10 Years Maybe
15 Years YES!

I've divested myself of all WD's post 2000, so most of my WD's are from the 90's. I'm not sure what the exact dates of transition are, but stuff pre-2000 does seem to have more content, more freebies and more variety.

Don't get me wrong, 1990's WD was still an advertisement first and foremost, but it was an advertisement that actually gave you more usefull stuff. And that's even before the free set they gave you with a years subscription.

 Fifty wrote:
I remember liking the ads almost as much as the features, just dreaming about how I was going to spend my pocket money. Nowadays, the main way to find out what products are available is the internet, and thus the adverts section of WD loses its relevancy.

Definitely this.

All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

 oni wrote:
All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

Unlucky there mate.

I think that it's current incarnation is actually very good.

The type of magazine it was before we had Blanchitsu and the articles about random hobby-related stuff was absolutely horrible.

I didn't think it was that great around issue 300 either, although we did get free stuff.

I also noticed that the magazine showed you how to make your own terrain around issue 200 or so as well.

So to summarize:

Golden age: issue 200-ish
Silver age: A tie between now and around issue 300 (I really like Blanchitsu and free stuff!)
Not even bronze age because it was so bad: Any issues between the 'free stuff' issues and Blanchitsu issues.

Please note that posters do not count as free stuff.

There was a Standard Bearer in a relatively recent one where Jervis Johnson goes on about how the most important rule exists so GW doesn't have to write tight, clear rulebooks. He spends the whole thing saying that we have the roll off rule so we shouldn't complain when we don't know how a rule should be played, and that sometime the game designers themselves don't know how it should be played so they roll off. It also felt a little confrontational in a 'if you don't agree with me you're not my target audience so neeer' kind of way.

I was under the impression his column was one of the only good things left but needless to say after my friend showed me that I was more than content to continue not buying WD.

 oni wrote:
All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

Perhaps that's the problem for a lot of readers? If you enjoy what Games Workshop is releasing now, and the way they go about it, then no doubt the magazine supports that well. I imagine if I'd spent 100 or so on some new releases in a store, just got the magazine thrown on the top of the pile for a fiver, and wanted to spend 10 minutes reading something on the train home then I might well be satisfied.

The problem is though of course, in terms of purely journalistic content (and perhaps the one area where it could trump the internet) the magazine is not a patch on its former self. There isn't really any content, and the whole thing just feels shallow, and soul-less despite all the nice pictures and high-grave cover.

omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

To be honest, it was a better catalogue back in the day too.

The catalogue section at the back of the book, generally listed new releases, old products that complement them and anything listed in the book in case you wanted to buy it.

Generally they also had 1 or 2 special deals, based on whatever GW was clearing out at the time. I remember drooling over a high elf army that was 30% off in a large bundle, only available for the month after that white dwarf came out.

These days are long gone.

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

You know what's worse than folks whinging about something?

Folks whinging about the fact that folks are whinging about something....

If you don't like these threads then leave them alone.

If GW was keeping the spouse happy then the marriage wouldn't be on the rocks.

The Auld Grump

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

Check Dakka Rule #1.

OP- Its a magazine... Its not going to save a marriage or win you a game. Its designed to showcase new releases and have vague BATREPs in order not to give up rules. It is what it is. I get more info from online Blogs. It wasn't that good 10 years ago and its not that good now.

Free scenery.

Free figures.

Free games.

Additional rules content.

Additional stories and fluff.

Multi month gaming events with free maps, scenery stuff, scenarios, how to's, unit and upgrades.

seasonal campaign materials.

Discussion.

Q and A's from designers/ sculpters.

Contests.

and...

FAQ's.



just saying......

 kevlar'o wrote:
omg lets stop these ''white dwarf is crap'' discussions.if you don't like it shut up and move along and if you love it so much why don't you marry it!

First you are dangerously close to breaking rule #1.

Second you are not in a position to prohibit a discussion on this forum because you don't like it. I suggest you 'omg lets stop looking at these 'white dwarf is crap' discussions' if they bother you. You are more than welcome to weigh in with your opinion, but if the only thing you have to say is 'everyone shut up' then that's not gonna work.

Thanks for listening.

Everyone else let's please move on without re-quoting this post a million times.


Back OT.

I was very hopeful with the revamp and promises a few months ago... in some ways things have improved, but in many ways they have become worse. I feel the pros and cons leave us with a net zero gain... same old in a lot of ways. Abolishing the points values in the battle reports though seems a bit much.

I think that the current lack of WD content is just another symptom - being a publicly held company is the disease.

Selling shares allowed them to expand quickly, but the share holders, for the most part, have little to no knowledge of the hobby.

What works for them is the Churn - folks in for the short time.

Not at all certain that there is a cure, outside of a buy back - which is unlikely in the extreme.

I have noticed none of the many companies that have been founded by ex-GW folks have gone public. Privateer, Mantic... both are doing okay, could be better, could be worse - but in the end they only have to answer to themselves and the folks buying their products.

The Auld Grump

The white dwarf was better during the 40k second edition era by far. However, even then it varied a lot month to month.

Unless you are brand new to the hobby and age 12 the WD is pointless now, I dont understand why any adylt would waste ten bucks on it.

Koppo wrote:

And the results:



So the new WD has more model show cases, less adverts, less gaming, and more descriptions than 5 years ago and about the same painting and modelling but event coverage has vanished, it costs a quid more in real terms.

Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

 Surtur wrote:


Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Certainly [from the 1st post]:

Product Description: Shows a fully painted/complete product with a description of background but no rule details other than names, no stats or points costs
Model Showcase: Shows an example of a product as an example of painting and/or modeling. Includes 'Evay Metal, readers armies, golden demon etc. Does not show step by step guides or paint names. Not enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it
Gaming: An article about tactics, a battle report, rules etc. If rules and/or point costs are included it’s a gaming article.
Modelling/Painting: Shows step by step guides and/or paint names. enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it, may be a detailed parts listing of a box.
Advert: Has a price or a product code in it.
Opinion: Usually standard bearer or similar. Does not include editorials.
Event: An article about an event, either upcoming or past. It can be very similar to an advert.
Store Listing: The store listing, store openings and other gumph that appears in that section of the mag.
Previews: Shows a green or details about a product without a release date

The categories are somewhat arbitrary but I decided to have a showcase separate from advertising as show casing includes non-WD staff/studio armies (such as GD entries and armies on parade) and they include conversions, example paint schemes and exemplar models. They may also include snippets of background about the fluff or decisions taken in painting or building/converting the model. The definition of an advert, for the analysis, was a page containing a product code and/or price and so did not actually have to include any pictures of any models at all (which if memory serves was a format that appeared in the older magazines).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

You are of course quite welcome to do the analysis yourself and compare your results to mine, I believe I have posted enough of my method for you do so. If you need further information as to how I obtained my results I will endeavour to assist you. If you believe my method flawed, could you be helpful enough to point out how so and where and how an improved method could be developed.

I do clearly define what I considered adverts for the analysis. If you think that a product description (as defined in the method) = advertising then I'd suggest combining the two values in any comparisons you make while coming up with your opinions.

Personally I feel the results are fairly accurate and fairly well described and qualified insomuch as necessary for a bit of random number crunching I've done for an internet forum as a bit of nerdy fun for myself.

Oh, gak, sorry. You're the OP. I didn't realise.

Yeah. The new WD is terrible. Pages and pages of big pictures, no text, no real content, paint-by-trademarks painting guide, and nothing of value. But I won't got on, Grot 6 very eloquently put up a list of reasons why new WD is just a coat of paint on the same rusty chassis.

Koppo wrote:

 Surtur wrote:


Ok, but first explain how model showcasing and description is not advertising.

Certainly [from the 1st post]:

Product Description: Shows a fully painted/complete product with a description of background but no rule details other than names, no stats or points costs
Model Showcase: Shows an example of a product as an example of painting and/or modeling. Includes 'Evay Metal, readers armies, golden demon etc. Does not show step by step guides or paint names. Not enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it
Gaming: An article about tactics, a battle report, rules etc. If rules and/or point costs are included it’s a gaming article.
Modelling/Painting: Shows step by step guides and/or paint names. enough detail is included to allow a novice modeler/painter to emulate it, may be a detailed parts listing of a box.
Advert: Has a price or a product code in it.
Opinion: Usually standard bearer or similar. Does not include editorials.
Event: An article about an event, either upcoming or past. It can be very similar to an advert.
Store Listing: The store listing, store openings and other gumph that appears in that section of the mag.
Previews: Shows a green or details about a product without a release date

The categories are somewhat arbitrary but I decided to have a showcase separate from advertising as show casing includes non-WD staff/studio armies (such as GD entries and armies on parade) and they include conversions, example paint schemes and exemplar models. They may also include snippets of background about the fluff or decisions taken in painting or building/converting the model. The definition of an advert, for the analysis, was a page containing a product code and/or price and so did not actually have to include any pictures of any models at all (which if memory serves was a format that appeared in the older magazines).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah those 'results' are pretty inaccurate. I mean, 50 pages of new releases isn't adverts? Three "articles" on that month's FW releases in the same issue isn't repeat advertising? Come on.

You are of course quite welcome to do the analysis yourself and compare your results to mine, I believe I have posted enough of my method for you do so. If you need further information as to how I obtained my results I will endeavour to assist you. If you believe my method flawed, could you be helpful enough to point out how so and where and how an improved method could be developed.

I do clearly define what I considered adverts for the analysis. If you think that a product description (as defined in the method) = advertising then I'd suggest combining the two values in any comparisons you make while coming up with your opinions.

Personally I feel the results are fairly accurate and fairly well described and qualified insomuch as necessary for a bit of random number crunching I've done for an internet forum as a bit of nerdy fun for myself.

Okay, you don't seem to understand this but product description and showcase ARE ADVERTISING. It's showing off a product with the intent to make it attractive to the buyer. It doesn't need a price tag at the end to make it advertising.

Last high point for me WD wise was back in 2009 with the Baddice Battle Report where they had Ben Johnson and Ben Curry face off and write about it. One of the best battle reports ever in WD. Also they still had the Masterclass painting articles which were great. Fun fact, the Ben vs. Ben game was played in Tom Kirby's office while he was away.
Flipped through some my old ones a while back after the last "Old vs. New WD" thread. There were some good issues, but there were some bad issues. The mid to late 90's had some truly atrocious issues that would make the current WD look like a tome of knowledge and wisdom. Paul Sawyer might be fondly remembered, but he put out some dog issues himself.
Sadly some of my really old ones got thrown out by my Mom years ago. Those include the cutout to make a paper Baneblade. Oh those were the days......

Though I never remember any of those free figs in issues. Only free kit I remember was the goblin/dwarf sprue at the start of 7th. I suspect the store owner pulled off all the minis and sold them in the "used" bin :(

silent25 wrote:


Though I never remember any of those free figs in issues.

The mid to late 90's WDs would have free figs from time to time. I still have a sister, necron, and a little flying 'nid.

I'm relatively new to the hobby in it about two years now. Went to a used game auction and picked up a ten pound box of white dwarfs from '97 and older. most were in between 189-210
but some were as far back as 136. paid $15. I found good content, they way things were seemed much less pushy towards buying something. Instead of hearing about how awesome it was they kinda give ya something for it, rules to see, applications for it, stories for the figs in a bit of depth. that was a cool thing to see. also seeing the prices made me feel slightly better for today's figs. I do like the "conversion corner" the newer WD's, but that's about it.

 Surtur wrote:


Okay, you don't seem to understand this but product description and showcase ARE ADVERTISING. It's showing off a product with the intent to make it attractive to the buyer. It doesn't need a price tag at the end to make it advertising.

I thought I had explained my reasons for the different categorisations. While I could count description and showcases as advertising by the same token I could count battle reports, painting articles, modelling articles or any mention of anything to do with wargaming in gerneral (as they talk about the models in use and e.g. provide a sample of usefulness for the product).

Like I said previously if you think that the categories I have used are essentially sub categories of some other super-category then feel free to add them together should you wish to use them to form a reasoned argument surely the break down is better than not having it. Other wise the table would be WD 329 pages 128, pages of advertising 128, WD 364 pages 120, pages of advertising 120 etc.
And that would be of no use to anybody.

The thing I noticed, aside from the actual content, in the last White Dwarf I looked at was the sheer amount of white space remaining unfilled. Especially on some new product pages and painting articles, photos of figures floating in a white void. It just wasn't like that, text and photos used to fill the page. It's just lazy, the 'new products' section at the front and the store listing and guff at the back have grown over the years and not added anything at all to the magazine. That's a big problem before you even look at actual articles inbetween.

one of the things i miss in the White Dwarf

 oni wrote:
All things considered... IMO White Dwarf is the best it's ever been in its current iteration.

I've been in the GW hobby since 1993 and while I appreciate the content of the older WD's for what it was at that time - the fact is the hobby has evolved from then to now.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
one of the things i miss in the White Dwarf
<Big Picture of Thrud>

You do know that GW never owned Thrud and Carl has done a bit of follow up work on him? I think there were four or five regular sized comics published from 2002-2007 or so.

Koppo wrote:

 Surtur wrote:


Okay, you don't seem to understand this but product description and showcase ARE ADVERTISING. It's showing off a product with the intent to make it attractive to the buyer. It doesn't need a price tag at the end to make it advertising.

I thought I had explained my reasons for the different categorisations. While I could count description and showcases as advertising by the same token I could count battle reports, painting articles, modelling articles or any mention of anything to do with wargaming in gerneral (as they talk about the models in use and e.g. provide a sample of usefulness for the product).

Like I said previously if you think that the categories I have used are essentially sub categories of some other super-category then feel free to add them together should you wish to use them to form a reasoned argument surely the break down is better than not having it. Other wise the table would be WD 329 pages 128, pages of advertising 128, WD 364 pages 120, pages of advertising 120 etc.
And that would be of no use to anybody.

I think part of this is that GW at some point made a deliberate decision to NOT include prices in White Dwarf. Their reasoning being that including prices made it frustrating for people reading old issues of White Dwarf to find the correct prices for products (real reasoning: hide price increases from people!).
Most people seem to think that any content which revolves solely around pictures of a box and/or the studio-painted miniatures of that box, to be 'advertising' for that box. This would include what you have termed 'product description', but not battle reports or modeling/painting. Obviously the entire mag is a advert for GW products; but the degree to which they hide this by making articles with content affects our perception, and the line seems to be somewhere around 'is there anything other than description of a single product here?'

Yep, I totally agree. I let my subscription run out about 6 or 7 years ago, and I don't buy it any more at all now. Every once and a while they'll fool me by including something that looks promising, but lately it's been a disappointment.

I still have a binder full of rules for Warhammer Skirmish, gut barging, gnoblar tossing, and (best ever) Path to Glory. Anyone remember that last one? It was a complete set of rules for playing a band of chaos warriors in a necromunda-style campaign. It had rules for experience, mutations and recruiting - really amazing stuff. On the marketing side, it even coincided with a tale of 4 gamers and the release of Warriors of Chaos back in 6th ed. I thought it was a brilliant strategy, and it convinced me to buy a pile of models to run the scenario.

If you want to look even farther back, who remembers the old cardboard warbiker rules from when they first released that model? I remember the 2nd ed hooplah about 'uge exhausts and the awesome fluff written about ork biker boyzz. Again, it sold a model to me.

My personal favorite series though, was a series of batt reps about a dark elf raid on a savage orc village. It had a set of great scenarios involving lighting the orcs' signal bonfire and waking Skabby the Shaman up from his shroom nap in time to fight of the skinniez. It sticks out in my early teenage memory as an awesome read, and I recreate the scenarios in games of Warhammer to this day.

By comparison, I haven't clipped anything out of a White Dwarf in years.

It's strange, because the actual gaming and production quality are substantially better - where has the content gone and why? I see no logical explanation. Better writing + better content = better marketing.

Confusedly,

Dan

All I have to say about the new White Dwarf catalog is: Out of all the US citizens they could have picked to write a regular column, why Vetock? It's like using the Jerry Springer show as an exemplar of American behavior. His columns amount to grade school essays on "What Jeremy did on Summer Vacation" It has always been a catalogue, now it's just an overpriced catalogue.


Oh and no real painting articles.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
one of the things i miss in the White Dwarf
{Thrud pic}

I also quite liked Gobbledigook, though Thrud was far and away better.

It all just added a bit more variety to the publication.

For me, it started going downhill, quickly, around the same time 'dragon' did and for similar reasons.
The shift to focusing exclusively on two games really held them back, I think.

GW was forced to drop prices from WD because the postal service wanted to declare it a catalog and charge them more for shipping ect.
I used to love reading WD's,rereading and then rereading some more
WD used to have modeling,converting articles,army ideas, ,proper battle reports,ect looking at older mags vs the new ones there is just a difference that you can feel in the look and the way things are written,

Now its,,,battle reports for the latest plastic crack followed by pages of adds for said crack .last WD I bought was for the sisters mini dex.

Sadly I don't think WD has been of value since the late 90's. Even back then my local gaming group much prefered the, now long dead, Citadel Journal, which always seemed like a magazine by gamers for gamers.

It's been a total waste of money for well over 10 years.

 LuciusAR wrote:
It's been a total waste of money for well over 10 years.

Hmm... I'd argue that there was a modicum of value to the magazine right up until the relaunch (largely through decent painting guides). Now it definitely is a total waste of money.

quite frankly i nolonger buy it. About 6 years ago i got one and thought it was good until i was given a load of old mid 90s copies. I promptly read them until they fell apart. Back then there was stories, comic strips, fluff, articles, guides on how to build terrain from junk and not just GW skull fetish kits. I could spend days on the tactica and a single magazine lasted me ages. There was coverage for necromunda, Mordheim, Battlefleet Gothic ( yes i actually have the one with the origonal play test rules for gothic and the card ships. Sure there was advertising but it was relevant to the content and more importantly it was mostly all stored in one easy clump at the back. It was a magazine. These days its just an overpriced glorified catalogue with a few bland articles on how good GW stuff is and how its the best stuck on here and there.

Has anyone picked up issue 400 that came out today? Not sure if I should get it but heard good reviews of it so far.

One question?

When was the last time anyone got punch-out terrain pieces in a White Dwarf like the bunkers, or the Eldar Waystone or the ruined Shrine for the Sisters of Battle release? Or complete beta versions of games, including all the punch-out pieces needed to play (Battlefleet Gothic). Or complete games, like Brewhouse bash or Pit Fighter, or expansions like the one to play "Dungeon" Blood Bowl with your Warhammer Quest tiles, complete with new tiles to add to the existing set?

You know, cool "free" stuff?

 scarletsquig wrote:
WD sucked hard 5 years ago as well.

It's been horrible ever since the giant issue of 314, which is prior to your dataset. Go back to issues 300 and prior if you want examples of a good magazine.

Also you're not taking into account quality. There used to be a *lot* more wordcount and a *lot* less whitespace. Battle reports are prime examples, they used to have a really detailed report with proper unit-by-unit breakdowns and maps for each turns and snippets of background to provide a narrative. These days it's a bunch of 2-page images with a few paragraphs floating around the corners. Massive images everywhere, massively giant fonts, massive amounts of whitespace, complete lack of actual words or any substance to the words that are in there is what has made it low quality, not the relative ratios of "this to that".

The adverts have never been the problem, WD has been loaded with ads for as long as I can remember. The quality of the content is the thing that has gone downhill. I used to be able to spend several evenings reading a WD since it was crammed full of text and really interesting stuff. Now it's barely good for half an hour.

For me it went downhill fast when AU started it's own branch ie printing in AU $ and in sydney (or something irellevant anyway) before that when Paul Sawyer aka Fat Bloke was still editor, (UK white dwarf- mid 90's) was when i remember good reading material after a period of several years, probably due in large part to the growing popularity of the hobby then, in this region, they decided to have an AU editior and branch if you will of Australian White Dwarf. the first two editors were fine, after that it went down hill and never recovered. more miniatures and more whatever does not replace quality reading material, it is a noticeable band aid attempt to either save face, a magazine or their sales which whatever may they be, but what is known for sure is the amount of veterans not feeling the support when they have helped GW over the years survive to the point they are at today (because lets be honest GW needs our money either via WD/BL/FW/GW kits/boooks sales in order to compete within the niche market- however it seems GW is in retirement village mode)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
One question?

When was the last time anyone got punch-out terrain pieces in a White Dwarf like the bunkers, or the Eldar Waystone or the ruined Shrine for the Sisters of Battle release? Or complete beta versions of games, including all the punch-out pieces needed to play (Battlefleet Gothic). Or complete games, like Brewhouse bash or Pit Fighter, or expansions like the one to play "Dungeon" Blood Bowl with your Warhammer Quest tiles, complete with new tiles to add to the existing set?

You know, cool "free" stuff?

Thankyou yet again, Aegis for that. i almost had forgotten the 2nd/3rd edition addiction of free stuff, posters (warhammer fantasy world map is the only newish thing for free i can remember), miniatures (white dwarf- the dwarf, necron, DE warrior, and several spacemarines/ 2 chaos/1 loyalist), pop out scenery or battle markers (sob shrine, whfb tower, battle tracker), and rulebooks within "several editions of WD generally mar the it'd conclude in may for example" and then they release yet more rules or free stuff. sometimes they'd have a unique code or something which used the WD's barcode or something which allowed you to pick up a 25-50% off certain stock usually when they released new stuff or had a new sstore opening nearby. Exalted Mr Aegis but +3

My Warhammer fantasy world map (WD 300?) is currently framed on the wall of our home office, lol.

I think WD 310 was the point at which the quality of the magazine nosedived beyond the point of acceptability for most - known as the 'Giant Issue' I remember a tremendous amount of stink on the forums when that magazine was released, and that was in the days when GW was giving people a lot less to complain about.

My favorite WD of all time (I still have it even now) I compare all WDs to this one...