The 40k community here on Dakka is decidedly toxic. A couple of years ago, I too found myself in the GW haters camp, and I'd like to share one simple truth, and my story of how I found my way back into loving 40k.
First off, here's the "truth" I mentioned for all of you haters out there: Your bitching here about all things GW, from their rules to their release schedule to their prices, will do nothing to change GW. Absolutely nothing. You're really just wasting your time and energy by complaining on these forums. The only thing that will change what GW does is how you vote with your wallet. It feels good to vent, I know, but just realize that's all you're accomplishing.
And now, my story of how I escaped the haters camp. I used to consider myself a pretty competitive player, though on the local level rather than nationally. After getting sick of GW for all of the reasons you hear around here (loose rules and prices, mostly), I went looking for a new game, and found Warmachine/Hordes. I bragged to all of my friends who were still playing 40k about how much better Warmahordes was, how much tighter the rules are, how it actually matters how I played on the tabletop instead of being won or lost in the list-building phase, how the boosting system removed some of the luck from the game and made it more of a competitive experience. I also came on here to try to convince people to stop playing 40k and play Warmahordes instead.
Now, two years later, after completely skipping 6th edition and playing tons of Warmahordes, I've found myself longing for a more casual gaming experience and once again buying GW models. I'm building up a Black Templars army, and I'm LOVING it. I've loved the Templars since I was a kid, but I didn't have enough money to build the army back in 4th edition and they weren't competitive in 5th. Now that I'm finally working on them, I've never felt so motivated to model and paint in my life. I'm playing casual games with fluffy lists, not caring if I win or lose, and it's a ton of fun. I still play Warmahordes when I feel like playing a competitive game, but if I'm looking to relax I turn to 40k.
The reason you (if you find yourself in the haters camp) hate 40k is because you want it to be something that it is not. 40k is not a competitive ruleset. 40k is a beer and pretzels, casual, lets-get-together-and-put-some-awesome-models-on-the-table-and-roll-some-dice-and-see-what-happens kind of game. It sucks that GW used to attempt to cater to the competitive player and no longer does, but that's how it is, and bitching on Dakka isn't going to change it. If you're unhappy with 40k, move on to a new system to scratch your competitive itch.
TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
Nate668 wrote: TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
But what if you play with a competitive mindset but like to do all the conversions and fun stuff associated with 40k that you cant do with warmahords and greatly dislikes warmahords aesthetics and fluff.
You cant just tell people to piss off and abandon the game they are already heavily invested in. and a simple find a new game is hardly helpful. there will always be resentment towards GW so long as they stay castled up and completely disconnected from the fan base.
and apparently the whole vote with your wallet is happening as sales continue to drop.
and drop and drop and prices increase to compensate. So the faithful that stay, have to suffer with price increases. Again, not fair how you treat your customers now is it?
The cure is a petition and a protest on their next release. If just half the players world wide stopped buying their products for a month they would make drastic changes. Remember they dont care about us. They care about our money in our wallets. Until we start using it as a weapon against them, they will keep using it as a weapon against us.
I'm sort of the same boat as you Nate. I am not a competitive player by any standard. I think competitive 40k is a complete and total mess. I too am building a non-competitive Black Templars army consisting of a bunch of heavy tanks because I like the look of the army. Easy to paint too. You know what, though? I still dislike GW. They're price gouging is out of control. If they want to sell me a casual, Beer and Pretzels (Which 40k isn't) game about making pew pew noises with unpainted/badly painted models... good on them. But 80 fething dollars? For three books of which two that I'll never get as much out of? It's insane. Completely insane. Not only are the rules overly complex but the balance is just crap. And they want $50 for their codices? Their poorly edited, poorly playtested, poorly balanced and quasi-catalogue codices? No! It's insanity. It'd be insanity even if were free. I could bear with GW on their pricing scheme if the rules were tight but they aren't.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote: If just half the players world wide stopped buying their products for a month they would make drastic changes.
Almost certainly not. They've not made any real changes even with continuing declines in sales volumes... other than to continue the exact same policies than lost them that sales volume in the first place.
To the OP: I quite enjoy 40k and other gw games... doesnot mean I have to bow to gw and love them unconditionally.
TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW.
...unkike bitching about bitching on Dakka!
Haha, the big difference here is that people who bitch on Dakka read and respond to posts on Dakka, while GW likely does not do the former and most certainly does not do the latter.
@Desubot: If people are putting so much time, effort and money into a game that they hate, I strongly believe that "pissing off," or at least taking a break for a year or two, is better than continuing to participate in something that makes them so unhappy. Maybe they'll find a game that works for them, like I did, or maybe the game that they want doesn't exist. Either way, it's a waste of time to complain about it on Dakka.
@Gold Tooth: All you can do is vote with your own wallet. The people who do not enjoy 40k should not be putting money into it, while the people who do enjoy 40k, flawed though it may be, will vote with theirs.
I quit GW for 3 years and spent that time on Privateer press and Spartan Games games, and came to the conclusion that it's the same gak everywhere. Might as well buy the minis that come with the most extra bits.
I will always like 40k. I've been playing 40k games since I was five years old and it holds many fond memories that continue to draw me to it. I am disappointed with the way GW is directing the game, but I feel I will at least stick with 40k as a casual game for as long as I can. Or at least play more Space Hulk.
TheCustomLime wrote: I still dislike GW. They're price gouging is out of control. If they want to sell me a casual, Beer and Pretzels (Which 40k isn't) game about making pew pew noises with unpainted/badly painted models... good on them. But 80 fething dollars? For three books of which two that I'll never get as much out of? It's insane. Completely insane. Not only are the rules overly complex but the balance is just crap. And they want $50 for their codices? Their poorly edited, poorly playtested, poorly balanced and quasi-catalogue codices? No! It's insanity. It'd be insanity even if were free. I could bear with GW on their pricing scheme if the rules were tight but they aren't.
This sums up my dissapointments. I wish what you are saying was not true
TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
People bitch because they love their game and it is frustrating when their time and money are essentially wasted with bad business decisions and rule changes. 7th was a good move, but they are still denying the competitive players the game they want. I agree, this community is often toxic, but it is because GW fuels the fire.
40K is a great pass-time/hobby. When I want to play a game for real I play Warmachine. When I want to BS with friends while moving my pretty army around the field I play Yahtzee-hammer.
As for the bitching, it will continue regardless of how little it does. Many of us have a lot invested and don't like seeing GW slap us in the face. That said, I do like 7th with slight modification
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gold tooth Jerry wrote: The cure is a petition and a protest on their next release. If just half the players world wide stopped buying their products for a month they would make drastic changes. Remember they dont care about us. They care about our money in our wallets. Until we start using it as a weapon against them, they will keep using it as a weapon against us.
Much like a drug dealer, they know enough people will pay anything. I have a friend who buys everything he sees, and rarely plays. If I say "I have some extra..." he says "I'll buy it" before I can even finish my sentence. People like that will keep GW afloat for now. It can't last forever, though.
I've been through the same cycle twice now. Hated third edition 40k and spent my time telling everyone I knew how bad it was, but slowly started to come back twoards the end of that edition as I made friends who played it.
Later I gave up again and moved on to Warmachine, looking for something more balanced and challenging. After two years of that, I realised I was not interested in the game and didn't really enjoy it, so I stopped playing and eventually sold all of my stuff.
Nowadays I play small-scale games of 40k, usually between 300 and 1000 points, although I'm looking at the Strike force rules in the new Horus Heresy book, so may go smaller. In addition to taht I have started playing Saga as well, which is a fun rule set, although I still don't get the same level of excitement out of it.
If you recognize that Warhammer 40K has problems, and yet you do not highlight those problems, then you're apart of why the game has those problems in the first place.
People who actually care about 40K will complain about it, because they see the game's potential and want it to be the best game it could possibly be.
So GW's blatant price gouging, awful business practices, questionable motions against small companies and individuals (I.e. "Spots the Space Marine") and increasingly lacklustre releases go out the window because I'm not a competitive player?
You can hate GW for reasons beyond "They can't balance their game for gak".
I'd also like to point out that most of us hate GW, and what they're doing to 40K. I like 40K, but I refuse to support GW.
Nate668 wrote: TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
How does poor balance make 40k casual rather than bad? How does paying more for less content make 40k casual rather than bad? How goes ridiculous pricing make 40k casual rather than bad? How does clunky rule writing make 40k casual rather than bad?
I've found much more casual games in Dreadball after stopping 40k, and see them in Deadzone, X-Wing ang DZC too which I plan to start playing soon. The games still have the same (or more) depth that 40k does, but they're made more casual by being quicker as they're not bogged down by clunky rules, they're cheaper to get into and they already have more players than 40k does around here now. So basically the premise of your argument is entirely wrong - 40k isn't a more casual game, it's just a bad game.
Not complaining won't fix 40k. Complaining has a small chance to and since I (we) have invested a lot of money into it, you're damn straight we'll continue to complain until GW fixes their gak. Did you tell people to shut up about the Xbox One before its launch too? The huge backtracking on the ridiculous features by Microsoft as a result of the complaints are how a company should act when their customers are calling their product gak. Whether or not GW wants to fix their product is largely irrelevant - it's gak, and we're going to call it gak to make sure other people know it's gak and don't 1. waste their money and 2. support anti-customer business practices.
These forums aren't GW forums, they're 40k forums. I love 40k, I "hate" GW and their business practices. I can still discuss the fluff, modeling and PC games here, why would I want to leave?
Nate668 wrote: The reason you (if you find yourself in the haters camp) hate 40k is because you want it to be something that it is not. 40k is not a competitive ruleset. 40k is a beer and pretzels, casual, lets-get-together-and-put-some-awesome-models-on-the-table-and-roll-some-dice-and-see-what-happens kind of game. It sucks that GW used to attempt to cater to the competitive player and no longer does, but that's how it is, and bitching on Dakka isn't going to change it. If you're unhappy with 40k, move on to a new system to scratch your competitive itch.
False.
A 'beer and pretzels' game has a 'beer and pretzels' price-tag.
With a premium price-tag I expect a premium quality game.
People don't hate 40k and people are not in a 'haters camp'.
People are in the "I absolutely love this hobby, I love it so much that I spend thousands of dollars on it and endless hours and I want the rules to be better for the price I pay for it"-camp.
And with a 15k point army and around 7 rulebooks I am not going to quit the game because you tell me to.
While many of us, me included, like to take jabs about how GW live in their own bubble, that is simply a hyperbole. If you think they do not do market research and look into forums like this, you are fooling your self.
Bitching here or on any other sizable open forum, does impact company policy, either directly (aka supplement releases) or indirectly (fostering competition by commenting on prices and other companies products).
Your problem seems to stem from the harsh reality of the ever shrinking GW supporters base. If you think this is a Dakka Dakka centric issue, you need a reality check.
GW are of course free to take the game in any direction they want, though they will have to face reality if they keep going against their customer wishes, which is becoming an increasingly relevant issue, as demonstrated by their last report.
Your problem seems to stem from the harsh reality of the ever shrinking GW supporters base. If you think this is a Dakka Dakka centric issue, you need a reality check.
Uh, it is. Dakka is great for lots of things - mainly creative/painting and modelling. But if I want an actual discussion about say, a new codex, I'll go to Warseer. Because they'l actually be discussing the new codex, not just a stream of rage about why it sucks.
Yonan wrote: Give me a little rage to balance out the fawning obsequiousness any day.
You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something? You realise on most fan sites if you went around slagging off the product/hobby, you'd get banned right?
You do realize presenting the negative aspects of the topic on any - third party - forum not only wouldn't get you banned, but is desired? Nothing but sunshine and flowers doesn't help anyone. Presenting the negatives of a topic are essential for a good, balanced discussion. 80%+ of the insulting I've seen has been from pro-GW folks here, and the 20% remaining only follows after people have had enough of being insulted.
(insert amusing quip re. not caring for balance + GW)
Yonan wrote: Give me a little rage to balance out the fawning obsequiousness any day.
You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something? You realise on most fan sites if you went around slagging off the product/hobby, you'd get banned right?
So the cure for you was to switch to WarmaHordes?
In our area, there is also a move from 40k to PP games. Some players have already moved totally, others try out the new 40k rule set and intentionally try to stay with GW.
Yonan wrote: Give me a little rage to balance out the fawning obsequiousness any day.
You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something? You realise on most fan sites if you went around slagging off the product/hobby, you'd get banned right?
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
Warhammer has alot of fan passion and posterity surrounding it. GW have not been overly kind to their customers for a long time. Of course people are gonna vent about it. GW have no official forums so places like Dakkadakka is where its going to happen.
Even if GW start getting more consumer friendly (which they are going to have to start doing if they want to survive!) people will still moan. It is the internet after all.
KommissarKarl wrote: Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
So, you see proof proving your point completely wrong and "haha that doesn't count". Interesting.
Yonan wrote: Give me a little rage to balance out the fawning obsequiousness any day.
You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something? You realise on most fan sites if you went around slagging off the product/hobby, you'd get banned right?
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
The only one "slagging off" are the ones like yourself that dismiss people rational critics and complaints as "slagging off" and "hating". The vast, vast majority of critics posted about GW are actually rational and valid and as long as you keep ignoring them instead of offering counter points, you'll keep getting those same critics.
KommissarKarl wrote: Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
So, you see proof proving your point completely wrong and "haha that doesn't count". Interesting.
Its their typical way of countering anything, they have 0 counter arguments to make, so they just resort to ad hominem attacks and "la la la I can't hear you".
PhantomViper wrote: and as long as you keep ignoring them instead of offering counter points, you'll keep getting those same critics.
This is what I find funny. The people who bitch about bitching like to pretend they have some morale high ground, but they are just perpetuating the same thing. Yes, the same "haters" are posting over and over again, but the same "white knights" are coming to the defense over and over as well.
The best way to change the "incessent hating" in to brief constructive criticism is to just ignore it, at most acknowledge it exists, lay down a counter point, then ignore it. It's a 2 way street, people don't just complain about GW for 10 pages, people complain, people defend, people complain, people defend for 10 pages.
KommissarKarl wrote: Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
So, you see proof proving your point completely wrong and "haha that doesn't count". Interesting.
Well I was so over-awed by your sample size of 1 that I lost the capacity to think rationally.
You also didn't address a single thing I said. I think we're done here eh.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The best way to change the "incessent hating" in to brief constructive criticism is to just ignore it, at most acknowledge it exists, lay down a counter point, then ignore it. It's a 2 way street, people don't just complain about GW for 10 pages, people complain, people defend, people complain, people defend for 10 pages.
Yep Insaniak has been saying the same thing.
KommissarKarl wrote: Well I was so over-awed by your sample size of 1 that I lost the capacity to think rationally.
You only need a sample size of 1 to prove something exists.
You: "You'd get banned for saying negative stuff elsewhere." Evidence: "Elsewhere, you don't get banned for saying negative stuff."
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets? That particular thread is one that is active. You'll see several other "slagging off" threads regarding the need for Mk3, Colossals and various other forum bingo points. The plastics have been a hot button issue ever since the Covergence of Cyriss were released last year due to the horrible quality of the initial casts. PP chime in on these threads (do a search, there are a lot) as this is an issue they are aware of and are obviously looking to fix.
Compare this to GW with Finecast. Bring up any quality issues and you'll either get told "modelling and repairing stuff is part of the hobby" or simply told to leave the store, yes both happened to me. Say ANYTHING bad about GW and it gets shrugged off or you cannot ever directly communicate with the people that can fix it, unlike PP due to GW having no official forums.
But you're not going to take any of this on board... So, yeah.
Never really understood the whole "Beer and pretzels" being a defence for poor rules.
Surely if your game is designed to be played whilst getting steadily intoxicated you should make sure it is streamlined and simplified in its mechanics wherever possible?
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
gif
That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets? That particular thread is one that is active. You'll see several other "slagging off" threads regarding the need for Mk3, Colossals and various other forum bingo points. The plastics have been a hot button issue ever since the Covergence of Cyriss were released last year due to the horrible quality of the initial casts. PP chime in on these threads (do a search, there are a lot) as this is an issue they are aware of and are obviously looking to fix.
Compare this to GW with Finecast. Bring up any quality issues and you'll either get told "modelling and repairing stuff is part of the hobby" or simply told to leave the store, yes both happened to me. Say ANYTHING bad about GW and it gets shrugged off or you cannot ever directly communicate with the people that can fix it, unlike PP due to GW having no official forums.
But you're not going to take any of this on board... So, yeah.
You know you're comparing customer services now, not fanbases right? And yeah I'd agree - GW have a huge way to go on customer service, they did used to be better. I'm not sure what went wrong, if it was because they got too big, or too "managerial". But certainly as a niche hobby product, they need to go a lot further communicating with their fanbase.
However I could name any number of companies who are far, far worse than GW, who do not attract anything like the level of hate that GW do. EA games literally release the exact same fething game every single year, for the same high price. Sure people (legitimately) complained about GW releasing a new ruleset only two years after the last one...well EA do that every single year. And it's the exact same game too. Conversely there are great companies like Paradox Interactive who have fantastic customer service, yet still attract an irrational amount of hatred and trolling. I don't think there is a connection between the quality of service a business provides, and the fan-base's treatment of them.
The toxic aspect of this community stems from threads like this where anyone who says something remotely negative is classified as a hater and hand waved away with poor defenses like 'Beer and Pretzels' and 'its a casual game'.
Want the community to improve?
Engage in a discussion without calling people haters and actually read/understand what people are saying. Then construct a counter argument that attacks the points, not the poster.
I don't think there are any haters on these boards. I see people genuinely concerned for a game they play or have played. The only hate I see is from people who can't seem to understand that someone may want a higher quality product for something they otherwise love.
Blacksails wrote: The toxic aspect of this community stems from threads like this where anyone who says something remotely negative is classified as a hater and hand waved away with poor defenses like 'Beer and Pretzels' and 'its a casual game'.
Want the community to improve?
Engage in a discussion without calling people haters and actually read/understand what people are saying. Then construct a counter argument that attacks the points, not the poster.
I don't think there are any haters on these boards. I see people genuinely concerned for a game they play or have played. The only hate I see is from people who can't seem to understand that someone may want a higher quality product for something they otherwise love.
This isn't difficult to understand.
This.
Brace yourself, the ad hominem attacks are coming.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Diggory_x wrote: The mods seem to really have their work cut out for them lately....
How so? No rules are being broken by these "hate" threads.
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
It is also a single post - not like the people who made made, and I'm not exaggerating, tens of thousands of posts slagging off gw/40k. You honestly mean to tell me that if I joined the PP forums I'd be allowed to rack up 10,000 posts doing nothing but slagging off PP? Because if so then I may well give that a go
gif
That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets? That particular thread is one that is active. You'll see several other "slagging off" threads regarding the need for Mk3, Colossals and various other forum bingo points. The plastics have been a hot button issue ever since the Covergence of Cyriss were released last year due to the horrible quality of the initial casts. PP chime in on these threads (do a search, there are a lot) as this is an issue they are aware of and are obviously looking to fix.
Compare this to GW with Finecast. Bring up any quality issues and you'll either get told "modelling and repairing stuff is part of the hobby" or simply told to leave the store, yes both happened to me. Say ANYTHING bad about GW and it gets shrugged off or you cannot ever directly communicate with the people that can fix it, unlike PP due to GW having no official forums.
But you're not going to take any of this on board... So, yeah.
You know you're comparing customer services now, not fanbases right? And yeah I'd agree - GW have a huge way to go on customer service, they did used to be better. I'm not sure what went wrong, if it was because they got too big, or too "managerial". But certainly as a niche hobby product, they need to go a lot further communicating with their fanbase.
However I could name any number of companies who are far, far worse than GW, who do not attract anything like the level of hate that GW do. EA games literally release the exact same fething game every single year, for the same high price. Sure people (legitimately) complained about GW releasing a new ruleset only two years after the last one...well EA do that every single year. And it's the exact same game too. Conversely there are great companies like Paradox Interactive who have fantastic customer service, yet still attract an irrational amount of hatred and trolling. I don't think there is a connection between the quality of service a business provides, and the fan-base's treatment of them.
EA attracts a lot of hate. Hell, some people on Gamespot even hated on EA when EA gave millions to Cancer research as apparently they didn't give enough.
So, you do realise that your counter arguments are meant to support your side and not counter it, right?
KommissarKarl wrote: However I could name any number of companies who are far, far worse than GW, who do not attract anything like the level of hate that GW do. EA games literally release the exact same fething game every single year, for the same high price.
... you realize that EA were voted the worst company in Americatwice in a row right? Kind of puts a downer on your argument that worse companies than GW don't get criticised as much.
I could paste and/or link some comments of mine criticising EA if you'd like ; p
KommissarKarl wrote: However I could name any number of companies who are far, far worse than GW, who do not attract anything like the level of hate that GW do. EA games literally release the exact same fething game every single year, for the same high price.
... you realize that EA were voted the worst company in Americatwice in a row right? Kind of puts a downer on your argument that worse companies than GW don't get criticised as much.
Also, "that" argument again...
There's some company worse out there, so we're not allowed to criticise poor old GW. You know, the whole "Starving kids in Africa" type of argument. Well, we're talking about wargaming on a wargaming forum and GW are by far the most reprehensible company in the wargaming world.
Blacksails wrote: The toxic aspect of this community stems from threads like this where anyone who says something remotely negative is classified as a hater and hand waved away with poor defenses like 'Beer and Pretzels' and 'its a casual game'.
Want the community to improve?
Engage in a discussion without calling people haters and actually read/understand what people are saying. Then construct a counter argument that attacks the points, not the poster.
I don't think there are any haters on these boards. I see people genuinely concerned for a game they play or have played. The only hate I see is from people who can't seem to understand that someone may want a higher quality product for something they otherwise love.
This isn't difficult to understand.
This.
Brace yourself, the ad hominem attacks are coming.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Diggory_x wrote: The mods seem to really have their work cut out for them lately....
How so? No rules are being broken by these "hate" threads.
Not because of the threads (although they are getting rather repetitive). Its more because some of these posts just seem to devolve into slinging matches rather than actual debates or discussions.
Grimtuff wrote: That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets?
Switched to cheapass PVC without reducing prices and sometimes increasing them (basic Cryx Helljack went up 25% in cost when switched to plastic; this was excused by blind rabid fanbois because you got bits for 3 weapon variants - the same people who did not consider extra bits a valid argument in GW's favour)
Made people buy the same model twice (rules on a powerful Circle solo got completely changed in Mk2, then a new model was released with the exact copy of the old model's previous rules)
Axed a "specialist game" in the middle of a release cycle, leaving a large number of fans with half-finished factions and lack of prize support while, to this very day, not showing enough respect to the players to at least give an explanation.
Prima donna, vindictive game developers who take personal offense at criticism. In my specific example, I posted an inappropriate comment about a new model and got suspended for it, fair enough. The next day, I got permabanned. The mod explained that a game developer (PPS_Simon, I believe) put in a personal request to get rid of me).
I'm sorry, but in the last few years PP grew to be big enough to treat its customers with exactly the same kind of contempt GW does. They just haven't been around long enough for the resentment to pile up properly yet. It doesn't help that much of their fanbase are GW converts, and converts are always the most blindly fanatical. Just look at born-again [religion of choice]. Or ex-smokers. Or vegans.
Nate668 wrote: TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
How does poor balance make 40k casual rather than bad?
How does paying more for less content make 40k casual rather than bad?
How goes ridiculous pricing make 40k casual rather than bad?
How does clunky rule writing make 40k casual rather than bad?
I've found much more casual games in Dreadball after stopping 40k, and see them in Deadzone, X-Wing ang DZC too which I plan to start playing soon. The games still have the same (or more) depth that 40k does, but they're made more casual by being quicker as they're not bogged down by clunky rules, they're cheaper to get into and they already have more players than 40k does around here now. So basically the premise of your argument is entirely wrong - 40k isn't a more casual game, it's just a bad game.
Not complaining won't fix 40k. Complaining has a small chance to and since I (we) have invested a lot of money into it, you're damn straight we'll continue to complain until GW fixes their gak. Did you tell people to shut up about the Xbox One before its launch too? The huge backtracking on the ridiculous features by Microsoft as a result of the complaints are how a company should act when their customers are calling their product gak. Whether or not GW wants to fix their product is largely irrelevant - it's gak, and we're going to call it gak to make sure other people know it's gak and don't 1. waste their money and 2. support anti-customer business practices.
These forums aren't GW forums, they're 40k forums. I love 40k, I "hate" GW and their business practices. I can still discuss the fluff, modeling and PC games here, why would I want to leave?
Poor balance and clunky rules make 40k worse than it could be. Ridiculous pricing and paying more for less makes 40k less accessible. Models that I personally find to be awesome give it some points for me. So do the background of the game, which I have been reading about since I was a child, and the random nature of the rules, which personally help me to care less about the outcome of the game. These things combined, for me, make 40k an alright game that I enjoy from time to time when I don't feel like taking my minature dudes seriously. When I want to take miniature dudes more seriously, I play something else. For you, (and many other people!- myself included, two years ago) the attributes of 40k make it a bad game.
But you're already doing the right thing by not participating in 40k anymore, because that's the only thing you, as an individual who is not affiliated with GW in any way, can do to directly affect the game. Some of you may think that GW reads these forums, and there's a slight possibility that that's true, but we certainly have no evidence to support the idea and I personally doubt they'd bother with a forum that is practically renown at this point for it's toxic 40k community. The next step, which hopefully will come naturally for you, as it did for me, because I think it will make you a happier person, will be to spend less time talking about how gakky 40k is on Dakka and focus instead on things that you actually enjoy. And then maybe someday you'll find that you miss 40k, and you'll come back to it knowing what it is, and not expecting it to be something else, and you'll actually enjoy it.
Or maybe you won't. But Dakka would be a more enjoyable forum for people who are actively involved in 40k if people like you (I do not mean this as an insult) who do not like 40k and do not play 40k did not come here to the 40k section to complain about 40k.
And I realize that the next logical step is for someone to say "you can't tell me what to do, I'll come on Dakka and spew vitriol about 40k if I wanna," to which you are absolutely correct. All I can do is express my own feelings and experiences on the matter, and suggest that you may enjoy your free time more if you spend your energy on things you enjoy instead.
@Kangodo: I'm not telling you that you have to quit the game. I'm telling you that you may find that you enjoy the game more if you take an extended break from it for a while, and I'm also telling you that if you have problems with 40k, and continue to make 40k purchases, you can't expect things to change, because GW probably isn't listening to you complain on Dakka but is certainly looking at its sales figures.
@BlaxicanX: I recognize that 40k has problems, am willing to admit those problems, and enjoy the game anyway. I have absolutely nothing to do with why the game has problems, which instead lies squarely on the shoulders of GW and it's employees. Don't blame the fact that you don't enjoy something on the people who do enjoy it.
Possible cure: Take up golf. Minimal rule changes. One set of necessary game pieces can last you for years. Proven competitive.
Control your costs by playing municipal courses or go for high end resort courses. No need to paint your game pieces, ever.
May even get some exercise swimming after the club you threw in the lake...
ciaotym wrote: Possible cure: Take up golf. Minimal rule changes. One set of necessary game pieces can last you for years. Proven competitive.
Control your costs by playing municipal courses or go for high end resort courses. No need to paint your game pieces, ever.
May even get some exercise swimming after the club you threw in the lake...
Just wanted to say that I played golf for the first time recently, and I wholeheartedly agree with this.
The difference between "haters" and white knights is that haters usually have a valid reason to level their accusations against GW. White knights simply insist things are fine without looking at the real problem.
I give it six months before Nate668 doubles back again.
Nate668 wrote: Or maybe you won't. But Dakka would be a more enjoyable forum for people who are actively involved in 40k if people like you (I do not mean this as an insult) who do not like 40k and do not play 40k did not come here to the 40k section to complain about 40k.
Considering how little some people seem to care about our enjoyment of the hobby - going so far as to insult us, calling us whiners, bitchers and haters in the OP for example - why would we care much about their enjoyment? It's interesting how your suggestion for us to enjoy the game more neatly coincides with what would make it more enjoyable for you - us leaving here.
Nate668 wrote: @BlaxicanX: I recognize that 40k has problems, am willing to admit those problems, and enjoy the game anyway. I have absolutely nothing to do with why the game has problems, which instead lies squarely on the shoulders of GW and it's employees. Don't blame the fact that you don't enjoy something on the people who do enjoy it.
That's exactly what's happening though. Your acceptance of what you admit are bad policies from GW makes you an enabler, and ensure not only that it continues but gets worse. We're not saying you should stop if you enjoy it - just that what you're doing is destroying the hobby ; )
My solution. I don't play pick-up games. Since I don't know what broken combo or PoS rule my unknown opponent can use, I just play 40k against one person, an old friend who has been wargamming just as long as myself and with whom I have an unspoken agreement to recognize and not use broken lists/combos. We both laugh off the terribly written rules that were obviously written by drunkards with a poor grasp of the English language. We meet, play a relaxing game while chatting about what's going on in our lives, shake hands then go have a beer. That's the only way that I can ever see 40k as being remotely similar to a "beer and pretzels" game; when you recognize that the company has no care, whatsoever, of producing a quality ruleset and just "forge" your enjoyment (screw the narrative).
I play other games with acquaintances/strangers because shoddily written rules won't be an issue. I'd rather avoid angst that would ruin any potential fun when trying to enjoy a hobby, that's the antithesis of a hobby to me. Some people enjoy angst and it's a big part of their hobby, not for me; however, which is why 40k will forever be played against one opponent.
Why not simply let people hate, if they so obviously enjoy it?
As can see, they would rather hate GW, than play other games (look how much more interest threads like this generate than threads about other games), so it's only testament to GW's power, really. Let 'em do it, I say.
Yonan wrote: Give me a little rage to balance out the fawning obsequiousness any day.
You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something? You realise on most fan sites if you went around slagging off the product/hobby, you'd get banned right?
Hahahahahahaha. As if that is anything like the rage that GW receives, seriously. That is constructive feedback about an aspect of their QC...not a 10 page thread of people agreeing with each other than the company are incapable of making a game that works *at all*, that it is "garbage", not to mention the many threads where some newbie asks an innocent question about something, only to receive a faceful of negativity.
That's nowhere near like the rage GW receives because PP doesn't warrant such rage. PP has forums where the designers frequent, they didn't close them down because people weren't happy. GW doesn't get constructive feedback because they don't want constructive feedback, or any feedback at all; they want us to just shut up and buy things.
The fact that GW is the only company to get such vehement hate speaks volumes about the type of company they are, now doesn't it?
The big difference here is that PP Is more likely to listen to feedback, GW pretends "Feedback? What feedback? Everything is great!" with their fingers in their ears. Yes, PP's PVC plastic sucks, and supposedly an upcoming release (the upcoming Convergence of Cyriss Battle Engine) uses a different material that they might move to; that's progress and a company that cares. GW would look at something like the complaints about Finecast, and still use corporate doublespeak about how great it is and you really should just deal with it.
As can see, they would rather hate GW, than play other games (look how much more interest threads like this generate than threads about other games), so it's only testament to GW's power, really. Let 'em do it, I say.
Why the hell would we want to hate GW? And we've said repeatedly that we *are* playing other games. *boggle*
As can see, they would rather hate GW, than play other games (look how much more interest threads like this generate than threads about other games), so it's only testament to GW's power, really. Let 'em do it, I say.
I recommend that you actually read what people are typing.
Would help create a better forum.
Beats classifying people as haters and dismissing what they have to say for no reason other than you don't like it.
Grimtuff wrote: That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets?
Switched to cheapass PVC without reducing prices and sometimes increasing them (basic Cryx Helljack went up 25% in cost when switched to plastic; this was excused by blind rabid fanbois because you got bits for 3 weapon variants - the same people who did not consider extra bits a valid argument in GW's favour)
Made people buy the same model twice (rules on a powerful Circle solo got completely changed in Mk2, then a new model was released with the exact copy of the old model's previous rules)
Axed a "specialist game" in the middle of a release cycle, leaving a large number of fans with half-finished factions and lack of prize support while, to this very day, not showing enough respect to the players to at least give an explanation.
Prima donna, vindictive game developers who take personal offense at criticism. In my specific example, I posted an inappropriate comment about a new model and got suspended for it, fair enough. The next day, I got permabanned. The mod explained that a game developer (PPS_Simon, I believe) put in a personal request to get rid of me).
I'm sorry, but in the last few years PP grew to be big enough to treat its customers with exactly the same kind of contempt GW does. They just haven't been around long enough for the resentment to pile up properly yet. It doesn't help that much of their fanbase are GW converts, and converts are always the most blindly fanatical. Just look at born-again [religion of choice]. Or ex-smokers. Or vegans.
I'm not saying they're infallible. Far from it, but PP are not even close to the vitriol that comes from GW's fanbase as they've turned them on one another. When PP lets their fanbase fight amongst one another and walls themselves up from the internet then they'll be getting to GW levels.
As can see, they would rather hate GW, than play other games (look how much more interest threads like this generate than threads about other games), so it's only testament to GW's power, really. Let 'em do it, I say.
I recommend that you actually read what people are typing.
Would help create a better forum.
Beats classifying people as haters and dismissing what they have to say for no reason other than you don't like it.
My dear friend, I think you've replied to the wrong post. Mine said how it's fine, whatever people say about GW, lovers or haters.
Grimtuff wrote: That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets?
Switched to cheapass PVC without reducing prices and sometimes increasing them (basic Cryx Helljack went up 25% in cost when switched to plastic; this was excused by blind rabid fanbois because you got bits for 3 weapon variants - the same people who did not consider extra bits a valid argument in GW's favour)
No, they've lowered prices in the vast majority of instances, the cases where they didn't were those where the new kits were replacing really old metal models, that due to PP's policy of very rarely making price adjustments meant that they were selling them with prices from close to 10 years ago.
lord_blackfang wrote:
Made people buy the same model twice (rules on a powerful Circle solo got completely changed in Mk2, then a new model was released with the exact copy of the old model's previous rules)
WOW! A single model? You wouldn't say? That's completely outrageous right there!
lord_blackfang wrote:
Axed a "specialist game" in the middle of a release cycle, leaving a large number of fans with half-finished factions and lack of prize support while, to this very day, not showing enough respect to the players to at least give an explanation.
I'm guessing you're talking about Monsterpocalipse over here? Anyway, I don't know about this enough so I can't comment on this.
lord_blackfang wrote:
Prima donna, vindictive game developers who take personal offense at criticism. In my specific example, I posted an inappropriate comment about a new model and got suspended for it, fair enough. The next day, I got permabanned. The mod explained that a game developer (PPS_Simon, I believe) put in a personal request to get rid of me).
With your shiny and positive attitude, I can't possibly understand the reason why!
But the fact that the mod explained to you the reason why and apparently gave you the honest answer is much more than you would get in most other forums.
lord_blackfang wrote:
I'm sorry, but in the last few years PP grew to be big enough to treat its customers with exactly the same kind of contempt GW does. They just haven't been around long enough for the resentment to pile up properly yet. It doesn't help that much of their fanbase are GW converts, and converts are always the most blindly fanatical. Just look at born-again [religion of choice]. Or ex-smokers. Or vegans.
They have? I still use the same models and lists that I bought back in 2003 and they haven't been invalidated in any way. The rules get better with each edition instead of being mere lateral shifts. Their magazine is still full of original content instead of being just a catalogue for the latest shiny. They have an active support program for local communities and tournaments. They haven't sent any C&D to any fan sites that I know of. They are still very, very far from what GW currently is.
My dear friend, I think you've replied to the wrong post. Mine said how it's fine, whatever people say about GW, lovers or haters.
No, I replied to the right post.
If you read what people are typing, you'd probably notice people aren't hating. They're a variety of other emotions and feelings, but not hate. Most responses about the state of 40k are stated calmly. If anything, there's an air of disappointment.
So, why don't people stop calling other people haters. Its not conducive to anything, and only looks like you're dismissing anything valid because you dislike due to its potentially negative message.
Grimtuff wrote: That's all you've got? Show me what things PP have down to earn the same amount of contempt that GW justifiably gets?
Switched to cheapass PVC without reducing prices and sometimes increasing them (basic Cryx Helljack went up 25% in cost when switched to plastic; this was excused by blind rabid fanbois because you got bits for 3 weapon variants - the same people who did not consider extra bits a valid argument in GW's favour)
Made people buy the same model twice (rules on a powerful Circle solo got completely changed in Mk2, then a new model was released with the exact copy of the old model's previous rules)
Axed a "specialist game" in the middle of a release cycle, leaving a large number of fans with half-finished factions and lack of prize support while, to this very day, not showing enough respect to the players to at least give an explanation.
Prima donna, vindictive game developers who take personal offense at criticism. In my specific example, I posted an inappropriate comment about a new model and got suspended for it, fair enough. The next day, I got permabanned. The mod explained that a game developer (PPS_Simon, I believe) put in a personal request to get rid of me).
I'm sorry, but in the last few years PP grew to be big enough to treat its customers with exactly the same kind of contempt GW does. They just haven't been around long enough for the resentment to pile up properly yet. It doesn't help that much of their fanbase are GW converts, and converts are always the most blindly fanatical. Just look at born-again [religion of choice]. Or ex-smokers. Or vegans.
I'm not saying they're infallible. Far from it, but PP are not even close to the vitriol that comes from GW's fanbase as they've turned them on one another. When PP lets their fanbase fight amongst one another and walls themselves up from the internet then they'll be getting to GW levels.
That's also because PP hans't been around for 30 years, doesn't have anywhere near the volume of followers/players that GW has, and isn't a publicly traded company. Not as many people are paying attention to them.
Saw a thread where Rick Priestley was talking about sales numbers of rulebooks, and he said that in GWs heyday, they were printing 100,000 rulebooks (3rd edition), and they felt that a print run of 40k was huge. He said that if you're selling 3-5k rulebooks in this industry, you're doing well. Those are incredibly small numbers, pointing out just how niche all of these games are. Its just at GW has been the biggest, with the broadest playerbase, and so receives the lions share of the negative feedback.
And while it is true there are no 'haterz' there are also no 'white knights' or 'casual gaming mafia'. There are people who like the game just fine (I've been playing since 2nd, and was heavy into tournaments up through 5th, and never really had a problem with the game); there are people who like the game but have issues with it (pricing, rules); and there are those who just don't like it. What really boggles is those who just don't like it, but who play it. Or those who don't play it, but continue to mock and complain about it.
As I've aged I've also realized I don't need drama with my 'fun time', and so what I've done is two-fold: cut waay down on my dakka browsing and participation, continue to play 40k with like minded players, and been slowly moving to historicals that don't suffer from creep and rules turnover. Those combined have made for a much more relaxing and much more interesting gaming experience.
Cruentus wrote: As I've aged I've also realized I don't need drama with my 'fun time', and so what I've done is two-fold: cut waay down on my dakka browsing and participation, continue to play 40k with like minded players, and been slowly moving to historicals that don't suffer from creep and rules turnover. Those combined have made for a much more relaxing and much more interesting gaming experience.
I wholeheartedly suggest using the Ignore function to further enhance your Dakka experience. It's done wonders for my blood pressure
If you read what people are typing, you'd probably notice people aren't hating. They're a variety of other emotions and feelings, but not hate. Most responses about the state of 40k are stated calmly. If anything, there's an air of disappointment.
So, why don't people stop calling other people haters. Its not conducive to anything, and only looks like you're dismissing anything valid because you dislike due to its potentially negative message.
I find the emotions to be mainly frustration.
People want to like 40k. They want to play an awesome game with the aesthetics and fluff that 40k has, but are so frustrated that everything else about the game is so awful, whether it's the rules, balance, prices or GW as a company.
Nate668 wrote: Or maybe you won't. But Dakka would be a more enjoyable forum for people who are actively involved in 40k if people like you (I do not mean this as an insult) who do not like 40k and do not play 40k did not come here to the 40k section to complain about 40k.
Considering how little some people seem to care about our enjoyment of the hobby - going so far as to insult us, calling us whiners, bitchers and haters in the OP for example - why would we care much about their enjoyment? It's interesting how your suggestion for us to enjoy the game more neatly coincides with what would make it more enjoyable for you - us leaving here.
Nate668 wrote: @BlaxicanX: I recognize that 40k has problems, am willing to admit those problems, and enjoy the game anyway. I have absolutely nothing to do with why the game has problems, which instead lies squarely on the shoulders of GW and it's employees. Don't blame the fact that you don't enjoy something on the people who do enjoy it.
That's exactly what's happening though. Your acceptance of what you admit are bad policies from GW makes you an enabler, and ensure not only that it continues but gets worse. We're not saying you should stop if you enjoy it - just that what you're doing is destroying the hobby ; )
You're right; you, as a person who does not play or enjoy 40k but comes to a 40k forum to complain about it, leaving for a little while would make Dakka a better place, which would in turn make me happier. But I also think it would make you happier as well. I'm not in the business of telling people what to do, but if I think there's some mutual benefit I'll make a suggestion.
And this whole business about how it's wrong that I'm "enabling" GW is ludicrous. 40k brings me happiness, and it is not your place to tell me to stop doing something that makes me happy. The same holds true for my position as well. If bitching on Dakka truly makes you happy, then it is not my place to tell you to stop. I, however, am working under the assumption that putting so much energy and free time into negativity does not make one happy. If this does not hold true for you, then we have a fundamental difference in opinion that we will not be able to reconcile.
Nate668 wrote: You're right; you, as a person who does not play or enjoy 40k but comes to a 40k forum to complain about it, leaving for a little while would make Dakka a better place, which would in turn make me happier. But I also think it would make you happier as well.
You do realize there's a lot more to 40k than the tabletop game right? We can dislike the tabletop game, not talk about the tabletop game and still spend a lot of time in this very subforum talking about 40k, be it novels, pc games, models, whatever.
And this whole business about how it's wrong that I'm "enabling" GW is ludicrous.
It's really not. When you reward GW by purchasing their $18 dataslates with 3 lines of new rules in them, you're encouraging them to do more of it.
40k brings me happiness, and it is not your place to tell me to stop doing something that makes me happy.
You even quoted me saying "we're not telling you to stop doing it" so where did this come from?
I don't hate GW (well, I'm not even 2 years in this game), but its business guidance has been terrible. Looks like the company only thinks about short-term strategies to appease the shareholders.
On the other hand, I love the influx of books, supplements adn nesw stuff. Of course, they could (and should) be cheaper
It doesn't help relieve the toxicity of the forum to start with a statement like that.
The sad thing is that some good points are in the post but who will bother to engage with them when you start out with something that will just annoy a lot of readers?
As before, the issue is when people dismiss all complaints as just being "whining" and, worse, tell anyone who has a complaint to just go elsewhere.
The "haters" used to love 40k, and may still love 40k but "hate" Games Workshop for what it's become. It's rude, condescending and not constructive at all to just dismiss all complaints as invalid ranting and raving from lunatics.
None of this changes the fact that GW does not deserve my business. Even if they fixed the rules I wouldn't go back until their corporate attitude changes.
I will not give money to a company that calls its customers "sheep" and think our primary enjoyment is buying their stuff.
Also, I'm deliberately trying to steer people (mostly potential players) from starting or coming back to GW games and going to better games. (almost anything else out there.)
Due to rules and prices, I don't have much desire to play 40k. I still play fantasy every once and awhile using either the Swede Comp or ETC and generally enjoy it. I don't think I'll ever be able to start a new army from scratch though, I have a family to take care of.
GW makes the best plastics and I really like the 40k universe. They should bring back a skirmish level game. The most expensive trips I have made to GW in the past year have been because of Mordheim and Blood Bowl. I bought a bunch of DE (both elves and eldar) for both of them.
It's not a coincidence that games like Infinity, Deadzone and Dreadball have taken off the past few years. I wonder how many of those players would prefer to play similar games in a 40k/whfb setting?
I don't want GW to fail, I want them to wake up. I want them to earn my money but that doesn't seem likely at this point. My group is having a lot of fun with other games with better rules and cheaper costs.
I don't hate companies, because they're companies. Their job is to make money. I disagree with all of their business practices.
I think that's the big disconnect people have is that they personalize it with GW to the point of being able to "hate" them, and that's kind of emotionally silly.
it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do. So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
Grimtuff wrote: I'm getting the strangest feeling of deja vu...
Yet another "attack the supposed 'haterz' thread"
I don't see it as a 'attack the supposed 'haterz' thread', its more like helping haters of GW (no matter how rightfully so) to see the field is greener on the other side.
No point in hating GW for every release if we can direct these people to other, more enjoyible games for a few years. Like the OP said, the most common complaint from GW are rules and price. There are alternatives out there with competitive minded rules and lower costs models. Giving these games a try is more constructive than complaining or hoping the entire Internet will stop buying GW for a month to force them to do something.
Like OP I have done my cycle, from hating what GW did to my BA during 6th, and my DA which never really took off after the helturkey. Now I just aim to finish painting what I have from GW and play casual games. I have moved on to X-wing for really fun games.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do. So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
I think that's an overly simplistic way of looking at it. TFG with his OP Super Morphin' Power List is easy to spot and dismiss. It's the gray areas that cause most of the problem. Take a player that really loves Eldar Guardians. He's loved Guardians since RT times. Well, he needs a way to get them up field to capture objectives, so what does he use? Waveserpents. Now all of a sudden he's a "TFGWAAC Player."
Or the guy that bought four Imperial Knights and has loved them since the yonder Epic days. He shows up and people refuse to play him.
There are so many more examples of these gray areas that aren't easily dismissed. These problems arise from a poorly designed game. The players are just trying to have the most fun in the way they think is best, but not everyone is going to agree on what that is. It's supposed to be the game designers job to create a game everyone can play. Its a failure in design that two normal people can show up for a pickup game with "fluffy" armies that very wildly in power levels so one person just steamrolls the other.
Not good game design. Not the players fault. GW's fault.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do. So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
Warmachine has a similar level of complexity in terms of combinations and synergies. No, the options for different units aren't as complex but each units special rules and how they interact are just as complex, if not more so.
Warmachine has none of the balance issues in 40k. There is no-one taking the equivalent of Wave Serpent spam. There is no-one getting the equivalent of 30+ summoning dice. There is nothing so game breaking that it has to blamed "on the player, not the game".
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do. So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
I disagree with this. GW and the rules empower the broken combos. Yes, there are some min/max players that immediately dive into new rules or a Codex with the idea of making the next *Star combo, but honestly if the rules weren't so loose and flexible that wouldn't happen, or if it did it wouldn't be as insanely broken. Instead, GW doesn't bother with tight rules, they err on the side of near anarchy by allowing everything, and leaving it up to the players to fix things. This has always been the case - even back in my day I recall the occasional article in White Dwarf about sportsmanship, and how for example taking mainly elite units was "beardy" or "cheesy" play. However, while they acknowledged the issue they never really took the steps to fix it, or rather balance things better to allow it without hurting gameplay (e.g. if you took only elite units, you suffer in other areas such as being outnumbered). Also you have the issue of things such as Wave Serpents which are too good, but fluffy. Should an Eldar player who wants mechanized infantry be penalized for lambasted as "TFG" because they're using the transport option for Eldar? Same with Necrons; the flyer is way OP but a "Cron Air" force is actually fluffy. Things like that blur the line between fluffy and WAAC since it's essentially both. That's GW's fault.
No, it's not the players fault. It's GW's fault. Things like the daemon summoning could have been curbed at a specific number, so could Warp Charges, rather than just left up to whatever and assume that players are going to set arbitrary limits or just not do it because they know it'd be broken. If the rules are broken, then players who exploit them share some of the blame, but ultimately the broken rules falls on the shoulders of the game designers who didn't account for it in the first place. Some exploits you can't find out until they happen (and then good companies issue an errata/FAQ to fix them), but any amount of playtesting or even thinking things through when coming up with the rule in the first place would have revealed that if Warp Charges are unlimited it'd be possible to stack them and summon virtually a second army of daemons.
TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW.
It may. Forums act as a lightning rod for unhappy communities and the dissatisfaction with GW has reached unprecedented levels. Passing off valid criticisms as 'hate' is sheer folly and it is almost certainly a trap that GW has already fallen into.
The real pictures will lie in GW's annual report which is due to be published in 3 weeks or so; given the train wreck that the half yearly report was, not to mention the preceding 9(?) years of declining sales, it will surely make interesting reading. Complaining about complaining and blithely passing off criticism as mindless ranting is not only bad forum etiquette it is also distinctly myopic.
TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW.
It may. Forums act as a lightning rod for unhappy communities and the dissatisfaction with GW has reached unprecedented levels. Passing off valid criticisms as 'hate' is sheer folly and it is almost certainly a trap that GW has already fallen into.
The real pictures will lie in GW's annual report which is due to be published in 3 weeks or so; given the train wreck that the half yearly report was, not to mention the preceding 9(?) years of declining sales, it will surely make interesting reading. Complaining about complaining and blithely passing off criticism as mindless ranting is not only bad forum etiquette it is also distinctly myopic.
Excellent point. I consider forums like a themometer. It gives you an idea of what's going on. It's not 100% accurate of course, but wide dramatic trends can be seen.
I've been around since RT times and I have NEVER seen the criticisms this bad and this widespread. There is a lot of genuine anger and apathy out there and it shouldn't be ignored. If GW was smart, they'd be paying attention.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. ... ...
\
Your logic is inverted.
The reason why some players are able to constantly search for the next broken combo is because GW wrote the game in such as way as to create such exploits.
Many "competitive" players dislike the current 7th edition rules considering them unplayable in a tournament setting precisely because they allow the most astonishing broken combos.
There used to be lots more restrictions on the game.
Oh look at this, another thread bitching about people bitching, while failing to explain how a balanced rule set would ruin beer and pretzels time, or why I can't expect one for the $220 they expect me to spend on the two rule books alone.
People understand that GW isn't listening. The customers are though. As said, "vote with your wallet".
Glad to hear how much GW works for you though nate668. Because that's my main concern when I looked 7th for the first time, I was thinking "damn I hope this edition doesn't negatively affect the level of enjoyment nate668 gets out if his beer and pretzel nights". And I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of all the people not impressed by GW currently as well.
But thanks for making this thread, now all the rest of us can sleep easy. I doubt there will be another anti-GW post in months after this.
SHUPPET wrote: Oh look at this, another thread bitching about people bitching, while failing to explain how a balanced rule set would ruin beer and pretzels time, or why I can't expect one for the $220 they expect me to spend on the two rule books alone.
People understand that GW isn't listening. The customers are though. As said, "vote with your wallet".
Glad to hear how much GW works for you though nate668. Because that's my main concern when I looked 7th for the first time, I was thinking "damn I hope this edition doesn't negatively affect the level of enjoyment nate668 gets out if his beer and pretzel nights". And I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of all the people not impressed by GW currently as well.
But thanks for making this thread, now all the rest of us can sleep easy. I doubt there will be another anti-GW post in months after this.
SHUPPET wrote: Oh look at this, another thread bitching about people bitching, while failing to explain how a balanced rule set would ruin beer and pretzels time, or why I can't expect one for the $220 they expect me to spend on the two rule books alone.
People understand that GW isn't listening. The customers are though. As said, "vote with your wallet".
Glad to hear how much GW works for you though nate668. Because that's my main concern when I looked 7th for the first time, I was thinking "damn I hope this edition doesn't negatively affect the level of enjoyment nate668 gets out if his beer and pretzel nights". And I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of all the people not impressed by GW currently as well.
But thanks for making this thread, now all the rest of us can sleep easy. I doubt there will be another anti-GW post in months after this.
Nate668 wrote: You're right; you, as a person who does not play or enjoy 40k but comes to a 40k forum to complain about it, leaving for a little while would make Dakka a better place, which would in turn make me happier. But I also think it would make you happier as well.
You do realize there's a lot more to 40k than the tabletop game right? We can dislike the tabletop game, not talk about the tabletop game and still spend a lot of time in this very subforum talking about 40k, be it novels, pc games, models, whatever.
And this whole business about how it's wrong that I'm "enabling" GW is ludicrous.
It's really not. When you reward GW by purchasing their $18 dataslates with 3 lines of new rules in them, you're encouraging them to do more of it.
40k brings me happiness, and it is not your place to tell me to stop doing something that makes me happy.
You even quoted me saying "we're not telling you to stop doing it" so where did this come from?
You're right, I was mistaken. You did not explicitly tell me not to buy/play 40k. But I stand by the rest of that paragraph.
Along those same lines, I never said that I buy all of the data slates. In fact, I haven't purchased any of them, and I agree with you that their pricing is a bit silly. Again, it comes back to voting with my wallet. I buy the stuff I like, and I don't buy the stuff I don't. That's how I, as a consumer, convey my opinions about products to the makers of those products.
Also, I would never suggest that it's unhealthy to post about the aspects that you do enjoy, if you can do so without being dragged into the parts that you do not. Even when I stopped reading the tactics and general discussion forums when I was taking a break, I still frequented the painting and modeling sections, for example.
@Kilkrazy: For the sake of transparency, I'll admit that the first post was meant to rile a bit, in order to draw attention to the actual suggestions I'm presenting. This is the internets, after all, and logical, calm arguments tend to be drowned out by all the bs. I don't want to get into discussing the method I chose, however, as it will take away from the point of the thread.
@MWHistorian: I was right there with you, when it comes to trying to steer people away from the game, but you just have to realize that while you personally may not like it, other people out there do, and it is not constructive to criticize those people (I'm not saying you do this yourself, as I do not know your posting history), and it's not really your place to convince strangers not to play 40k of they aren't asking the question "should I play 40k?" Or "what game should I play?"
Actually, I do consider it my place to discourage people from playing 40k. I believe there are better games that might serve their needs more. Also, it's another form of voting with my wallet. They used to rely on veteran's word of mouth, but now I want to turn that against them so they'll finally take notice.
SHUPPET wrote: Oh look at this, another thread bitching about people bitching, while failing to explain how a balanced rule set would ruin beer and pretzels time, or why I can't expect one for the $220 they expect me to spend on the two rule books alone.
People understand that GW isn't listening. The customers are though. As said, "vote with your wallet".
Glad to hear how much GW works for you though nate668. Because that's my main concern when I looked 7th for the first time, I was thinking "damn I hope this edition doesn't negatively affect the level of enjoyment nate668 gets out if his beer and pretzel nights". And I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of all the people not impressed by GW currently as well.
But thanks for making this thread, now all the rest of us can sleep easy. I doubt there will be another anti-GW post in months after this.
Be sure to check back in when 8th drops nate668!
Man, you're so far off the point I'm trying to make. I'll summarize as clearly as I can here:
40k has (and frankly, always has had) some fundamental flaws that make it unsuited to competitive play. This sucks! We all wish it was better. The only thing we can do to affect GW is to vote with our wallets, and avoid purchasing the things we disagree with. Complaining on Dakka will not change 40k, and is a waste of time and energy that could be better spent doing something that makes each of us happy. If you take a break from 40k, you may find that you still want nothing to do with it years from now, or you may be able to accept it for it's shortcomings and find that you enjoy it for what it is. Either way, you will have more time and energy to devote to things you like, and Dakka will be a better place for everyone.
If I drop 40k once 8th comes around, you won't find me here posting about it, because I'd rather spend my time doing something productive or having fun instead of complaining about things that I wish I liked.
SHUPPET wrote: Oh look at this, another thread bitching about people bitching, while failing to explain how a balanced rule set would ruin beer and pretzels time, or why I can't expect one for the $220 they expect me to spend on the two rule books alone.
People understand that GW isn't listening. The customers are though. As said, "vote with your wallet".
Glad to hear how much GW works for you though nate668. Because that's my main concern when I looked 7th for the first time, I was thinking "damn I hope this edition doesn't negatively affect the level of enjoyment nate668 gets out if his beer and pretzel nights". And I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of all the people not impressed by GW currently as well.
But thanks for making this thread, now all the rest of us can sleep easy. I doubt there will be another anti-GW post in months after this.
Be sure to check back in when 8th drops nate668!
Man, you're so far off the point I'm trying to make. I'll summarize as clearly as I can here:
40k has (and frankly, always has had) some fundamental flaws that make it unsuited to competitive play. This sucks! We all wish it was better. The only thing we can do to affect GW is to vote with our wallets, and avoid purchasing the things we disagree with. Complaining on Dakka will not change 40k, and is a waste of time and energy that could be better spent doing something that makes each of us happy. If you take a break from 40k, you may find that you still want nothing to do with it years from now, or you may be able to accept it for it's shortcomings and find that you enjoy it for what it is. Either way, you will have more time and energy to devote to things you like, and Dakka will be a better place for everyone.
If I drop 40k once 8th comes around, you won't find me here posting about it, because I'd rather spend my time having fun instead of complaining about things that I wish I liked.
Except complaining on Dakka might effect that change for the following reason.
A player looking into starting tabletop wargames will likely look at forums to see what the community is like and whether there's any things they should know before they put a load of money down. And so they might see the problems highlighted by users here and decide to spend their money elsewhere.
That results in less sales for GW and so you have effectively got someone to vote with their wallet without actually ever giving GW any money, which is the best outcome from a wallet-voting standpoint.
GWs entire "marketing strategy" is based on existing players recruiting new players and, nowadays, often the easiest way to do that is on the internet. And so complaining on the internet about real issues with the game and GW allows you to tell the largest pool of people about those issues. The customer has never had as much power to force change from a company as they do now with the internet as it easily allows you to address a huge amount of people.
However it may turn out there are more people who like the new version of the game than the old one..
I would find that a bit strange since the new edition doesn't do anything to address the grievances of the players that left the game with 6th, but instead seems to double down on most of them.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do..
why "impossible"?
I disagree that this is the case. Hard? Sure. But impossible? No. And what about the potential rewards? A redesign from the ground up is not an impossible thing. its also been done before - even by GW in their shift from 2nd to 3rd.
Also, i find it ironic that you equate tight rules with restriction built upon restriction - but look at the game you have now. Loads of the options are effectively no-go areas and might as well not be counted.
bullyboy wrote: i So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
and this is a thing because of shoddy rules. Had the rules been balanced, those lists would be a thing, but wouldnt have any of the negative connotations. 20 beasts? Sure why not. a balanced game would mean you could play those lists because you liked them and thought they were cool, without any backlash from the community. and why should the beastmaster and 20 beast player feel bad? Why should be suffer some one elses temper tantrum? Is their choices not as valid? Hmm. Who are you to tell him his choices are invalid? who are you to say he is"abusing" the freedom when it might simply be something he finds engaging and appealing? you cant just label people because they have a different perspective.
What we have with 40k is self policing via social control, negative stigmatisation and group pressure. Bullying by other words. if anything, this attitude leads to even more resentment within the player base.
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
See above. it is possible to have a flexible rules set that is well made.
Once you've escaped GW and 40k and moved on to greener pastures, sometimes you want to bitch and moan and point out flaws in the hopes other people will leave too.
Some tabletop gaming is better than no tabletop gaming, but I feel like there are better ways to spend precious tabletop gaming time than 40k.
I dislike the idea that 40k should only be enjoyed as a "beer and pretzels game". That's basically just excusing poor game design.
I'm not a very competitive gamer anymore, but a more balanced ruleset can't hurt anything.
To me, what's worse, is that 40k's rules just feel sloppy, they don't feel like a narrative oriented game, the rules are still made for what really are pickup games with even points levels of indeterminate forces.
Essentially this means the basic game setup is one of a competitive "pick up and play" game, but everything else that follows doesn't fit this, it's basically "yeah um, just take whatever stuff you bought from us and do stuff with it". Ultimately this doesn't really make it a "beer and pretzels" game, it makes it a badly designed game and relies entirely on players (having already set up for a "competitive" type game) to then make it a "narrative".
There are other games that really do go out of their way to do the Narrative thing much better, and would often have specific scenarios that would explain exactly how terrain would be laid out, what armies had which units, etc.
GW's current method of "here's a tournament style mission and deployment setup, then throw down whatever toss dice" is just really sloppy and feels like it's trying to do too many things, and does them all very poorly.
Personally, a tighter ruleset would make 40k more of a beer and pretzels game to me because having to stop and puzzle out what the drunken monkey who wrote the rule meant when he wrote it is just pure buzzkill.
In fact, Kirby et al shall forever be known collectively as Buzzkillington Inc.
Not trying to discourage anyone from playing 40k that way, but I've found Dreadball to be a *much* better beer and pretzels game than 40k. 15 min games, fast action, good depth and rapid changes in fortune for players make it not only fun to play, but fun to watch. It also has a 2-6 player version so no one has to be left out - which is great because I rarely drink with just one friend.
KommissarKarl wrote: You're saying that a forum dedicated to discussing something, shouldn't be pro-something?
Not intrinsically, no. A forum dedicated to discussing something should be pro-discussion.
That means there should be room for everybody's opinion on that thing.
Some forums appear to be more positive overall because they choose to delete anything they see as overly negative. We prefer to allow people to share their opinions, provided they remain civil about it. Stifling any criticism doesn't create a healthy community... just one that is blind to any problems.
You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
A narrative rules set would allow for more variety in what you pick (okay as much as I hate it Unbound did this somewhat) without opening the floodgates to just take every broken thing in your army (Unbound). A narrative rules set would allow for actual scenarios that could be part of a larger battle, not a bunch of missions that are just minor variations of the same thing. A narrative rules set wouldn't just have a ton of random gak thrown in like the objective cards or warlord traits; you'd be able to buy/pick a trait for your army that fits your commander's theme and flesh them out. A narrative rules set would allow for odd scenarios like the Roarke's Drift one with Praetorians vs. Orks, with imbalanced forces by design to add to the story.
40k doesn't do any of those things. They claim it's a narrative game, but they aren't offering anything to make it that way, in fact what they offer is little better than making up rules as you go and godmodding.
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
Couldn't agree more! I wish we could find an experienced wargamer who lived in a 40k-less vacuum, then give them the rulebook (minus the intro paragraph about forging a narrative) and let them play, and see if they consider the game narrative based. To me the rules do not encourage, support, or lend themselves to narrative gaming at all. Especially compared to ACTUAL narrative games like Star Wars Edge of the Empire or even the Mouseguard RPG.
The designers push for one thing, then the rules speak volumes to the opposite.
Any crying that 40ks rules are cinematic and/or narrative should look at Deadzone. THAT game is cinematic as hell, as well as being fluid and fun. Having complex rules and special rules on every unit does not make it cinematic.
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
A narrative rules set would allow for more variety in what you pick (okay as much as I hate it Unbound did this somewhat) without opening the floodgates to just take every broken thing in your army (Unbound). A narrative rules set would allow for actual scenarios that could be part of a larger battle, not a bunch of missions that are just minor variations of the same thing. A narrative rules set wouldn't just have a ton of random gak thrown in like the objective cards or warlord traits; you'd be able to buy/pick a trait for your army that fits your commander's theme and flesh them out. A narrative rules set would allow for odd scenarios like the Roarke's Drift one with Praetorians vs. Orks, with imbalanced forces by design to add to the story.
40k doesn't do any of those things. They claim it's a narrative game, but they aren't offering anything to make it that way, in fact what they offer is little better than making up rules as you go and godmodding.
They could've even returned the old rogue trader campaign rules, the various sets that allow for wounds to say your warboss, maybe even buy upgrades from the Mad Dok who may accidentally give him a squig brain.
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
A narrative rules set would allow for more variety in what you pick (okay as much as I hate it Unbound did this somewhat) without opening the floodgates to just take every broken thing in your army (Unbound). A narrative rules set would allow for actual scenarios that could be part of a larger battle, not a bunch of missions that are just minor variations of the same thing. A narrative rules set wouldn't just have a ton of random gak thrown in like the objective cards or warlord traits; you'd be able to buy/pick a trait for your army that fits your commander's theme and flesh them out. A narrative rules set would allow for odd scenarios like the Roarke's Drift one with Praetorians vs. Orks, with imbalanced forces by design to add to the story.
40k doesn't do any of those things. They claim it's a narrative game, but they aren't offering anything to make it that way, in fact what they offer is little better than making up rules as you go and godmodding.
They could've even returned the old rogue trader campaign rules, the various sets that allow for wounds to say your warboss, maybe even buy upgrades from the Mad Dok who may accidentally give him a squig brain.
It was Narrative!
There were rules for XP upgrade ideas in the back of the 4th ed Rulebook too, along with an example campaign. Not comprehensive but gave good starting points as to what kind of thing you could do to actually tie battles together with consequences of losing units in battle etc.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base. The constant search for the next "star" or broken combo is what drives the game in the wrong direction. GW could tighten the rules by adding restriction after restriction, but with so many options currently available, it would take a serious commitment and culling to do so. Basically starting from scratch which is almost impossible to do. So what do players do? They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
I think that's an overly simplistic way of looking at it. TFG with his OP Super Morphin' Power List is easy to spot and dismiss. It's the gray areas that cause most of the problem. Take a player that really loves Eldar Guardians. He's loved Guardians since RT times. Well, he needs a way to get them up field to capture objectives, so what does he use? Waveserpents. Now all of a sudden he's a "TFGWAAC Player."
I would disagree with this. We have a tau player who's collected for about fifteen years, and after the new codex came out the only person who had a problem with him was the waac/cheater guy, who immediately called cheese and refused to play against him. I think, as long as your gaming group knows you, this sort of thing shouldn't be a problem. Hell if anything people are happy when they finally start stomping face - I was genuinely pleased for my eldar friend when he *finally* started winning some battles, regardless of how "cheese" or "op" some might have called them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
.
That's because you refuse to use any non-negative adjective to describe GW. I often see on dakka people saying "40k is not beer and pretzals", "40k is not casual" etc etc. Can you think of a single non-negative word you'd use to describe 40k?
Conveniently brushing aside the obvious fact that more people play 40k as a narrative game than play all other tabletop games put together, obviously.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote: The cure is a petition and a protest on their next release. If just half the players world wide stopped buying their products for a month they would make drastic changes. Remember they dont care about us. They care about our money in our wallets. Until we start using it as a weapon against them, they will keep using it as a weapon against us.
That's a good idea, but plenty of people lack the self control to stop impulse buying things like Riptides and Wraithknights.
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
.
That's because you refuse to use any non-negative adjective to describe GW. I often see on dakka people saying "40k is not beer and pretzals", "40k is not casual" etc etc. Can you think of a single non-negative word you'd use to describe 40k?
Conveniently brushing aside the obvious fact that more people play 40k as a narrative game than play all other tabletop games put together, obviously.
Setting aside your dropping of our previous discussion, the reason people play 40k as a narrative game is because of the fluff - not the rules. The 40k setting is amazing, who doesn't love the idea of chainsword wielding warrior monks charging into the ranks of a dying elder race with righteous fury? The problem is that doesn't work on the tabletop with melee being gimped unless you have a good way to get the models into combat - and even then, only the durable ones like wraiths excel. What have GW done lately that deserves a positive adjective? The only two things I can think of are the increased speed of releases (if you ignore potential quality concerns) and the introduction of some larger bundles that actually have discounts, of which I bought 3 each of the SM strike forces - that's (I shudder to think) something like $1200 I've spent on GW because for once they had models (that I wanted) sold at a reasonable price, from a US discounter. Note: I had to avoid 1. regional pricing in Australia and 2. the RRP to get this decent price. But still, I've complemented them on these and their paints recently because those are the only things they have done that I can think of that are worth compliments.
WayneTheGame wrote: You know, one thing I often dislike is that 40k isn't even an narrative game. I know I've said this before but it keeps getting stuck in my craw, as it were. Nothing about 40k's rules are narrative anything, they're sloppy.
.
That's because you refuse to use any non-negative adjective to describe GW. I often see on dakka people saying "40k is not beer and pretzals", "40k is not casual" etc etc. Can you think of a single non-negative word you'd use to describe 40k?
Conveniently brushing aside the obvious fact that more people play 40k as a narrative game than play all other tabletop games put together, obviously.
Setting aside your dropping of our previous discussion, the reason people play 40k as a narrative game is because of the fluff - not the rules.
.
So people *do* play it as a narrative game? I appreciate your agreement, even if your insistance on trying to make me out to be somehow defending 40k is a little grating. Yes it's clunky and way too bloated but people still have fun playing it, the refusal to acknowledge that fact is one of the reasons that people are labeled as "haters" or "whingers" because they always push it to the extreme in stating that it is *too* bloated or *too* clunky to be playable at all. Just look at the above post - the refusal that 40k is a casual game when it demonstrably is, under more or less any definition of casual.
No one said that people don't play it as a narrative game, just that the lack of balance, unnecessary randomness and clunky rules doesn't help it be played that way. Also the lack of "narrative" rules such as the campaign rules in Deadzone make it's ability to play narratively worse than other games. So the argument is that while yes you can play it as a narrative game, it's 1. not as good as it could be and 2. worse than other games (except for the one redeeming factor, it's fluff).
Depending on your tolerances and how you play, 40k can be casual I guess, but it's certainly not optimal as a casual game given 1. investment required, 2. complexity of rules and 3. time required to play. You can probably play it casually, but other games are better at being casual because they don't suffer those three problems.
No one is saying people can't have fun playing 40k - or that we want them to not have fun. We're saying it's not as fun as it should be (for anyone), if some small changes were made by GW it would be that much fun again. Since those changes haven't been made, many of us are finding more fun playing elsewhere, even though we love the 40k setting and are willing to put up with a lot of gak to play in it - just not this much, which has ramped up rapidly since 6th.
Yonan wrote: No one said that people don't play it as a narrative game, just that the lack of balance, unnecessary randomness and clunky rules doesn't help it be played that way. Also the lack of "narrative" rules such as the campaign rules in Deadzone make it's ability to play narratively worse than other games. So the argument is that while yes you can play it as a narrative game, it's 1. not as good as it could be and 2. worse than other games (except for the one redeeming factor, it's fluff)..
That was not the jist of the post I replied to, I would probably agree with both of your points. The post I replied to literally said "40k isn't even a casual game", when it demonstrably is.
I'll leave that poster to back up his absolute if he wants to. I just stand by it not being as much of a casual game as other games, and that the problems we have with it - which some defend by saying it's to make 40k more casual - in fact don't make it more casual, if anything they can be proven to make it less casual.
KommissarKarl wrote: Yes it's clunky and way too bloated but people still have fun playing it, the refusal to acknowledge that fact is one of the reasons that people are labeled as "haters" or "whingers" because they always push it to the extreme in stating that it is *too* bloated or *too* clunky to be playable at all.
People occasionally have fun playing lots of bad games. That doesn't make them good games.
Just look at the above post - the refusal that 40k is a casual game when it demonstrably is, under more or less any definition of casual.
No, 40k isn't even close to a casual game. A casual game is one that you can play "out of the box" without too many rules to learn, have a quick game or two without putting much attention into it, and then do something else. 40k is the exact opposite: you have to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars just to get started, learning the rules takes ages, setting up a game takes longer than playing an entire game of a real "casual" game, and you'd better have a few hours available to play your epic battle. That's not casual, it's a serious hobby that demands huge investments to get any reward out of it.
The only reason anyone thinks 40k is a casual game is that GW has convinced them that "don't ask any questions about how the rules are supposed to work" is all you need to have a casual game.
Yonan wrote: I'll leave that poster to back up his absolute if he wants to. I just stand by it not being as much of a casual game as other games, and that the problems we have with it - which some defend by saying it's to make 40k more casual - in fact don't make it more casual, if anything they can be proven to make it less casual.
Can you give me a single instance of somebody saying "Rule x is unclearly written because it makes the game more casual"? Or "This mechanic does not work properly because 40k is casual"?
Yonan wrote: I'll leave that poster to back up his absolute if he wants to. I just stand by it not being as much of a casual game as other games, and that the problems we have with it - which some defend by saying it's to make 40k more casual - in fact don't make it more casual, if anything they can be proven to make it less casual.
Can you give me a single instance of somebody saying "Rule x is unclearly written because it makes the game more casual"? Or "This mechanic does not work properly because 40k is casual"?
I think you missed my point. My point was that people say "the lack of clarity in the rules allow you to interpret it in your own way, which makes the game more casual."
edit: Maybe that is what you meant with the first one. I'll try and dig some up.
KommissarKarl wrote: Yes it's clunky and way too bloated but people still have fun playing it, the refusal to acknowledge that fact is one of the reasons that people are labeled as "haters" or "whingers" because they always push it to the extreme in stating that it is *too* bloated or *too* clunky to be playable at all.
People occasionally have fun playing lots of bad games. That doesn't make them good games.
Yes it does. The point of a game is for the players to have fun. If they do this, that game is objectively good, regardless of whatever arbitrary criteria you might hold it up to. You are of course free to analyse and critisise a game when compared to other games and point out what you perceive its failings to be, but that doesn't make your opinion any better or worse's than any others.
If I design a game where you and I flip a coin each - if I flip a heads I win, if you flip a heads or tails you still lose. Clearly we won't enjoy or play this game, therefore I would consider it objectively bad. People aren't stupid (well I'm not sure about that), they wouldn't sit around playing 40k if they weren't enjoying themselves. And since they are enjoying themselves, it's a successful game.
Incidentally I feel this way about plenty of things that I regard as crap. The Sims has outsold Europa Universalis a billion times over, yet I still consider it utter trash. And yet, due to its popularity, I have to acknowledge that it is a successful and good game. Ditto how way more people will watch Lee Evans than Charlie Brooker, despite me having risible contempt for the former. And yet millions of people will tune in to watch him, so again on some level I have to acknowledge a talent there.
Yonan wrote: I'll leave that poster to back up his absolute if he wants to. I just stand by it not being as much of a casual game as other games, and that the problems we have with it - which some defend by saying it's to make 40k more casual - in fact don't make it more casual, if anything they can be proven to make it less casual.
Can you give me a single instance of somebody saying "Rule x is unclearly written because it makes the game more casual"? Or "This mechanic does not work properly because 40k is casual"?
I think you missed my point. My point was that people say "the lack of clarity in the rules allow you to interpret it in your own way, which makes the game more casual."
Okay, can you give me an instance of that instead? Because I think you're confusing the notion of "it's not important that the rules are unclear because we play it casually" vs "the rules are unclear and that makes it casual". I would agree with the former (while acknowledging that it can and should be clearer), I don't think I've ever seen anyone state what it is you appear to so vehemently disagree with.
Edit - nevermind I'm going to bed now. Reply if you want but I can't guarantee I'll get back to you.
KommissarKarl wrote: Yes it's clunky and way too bloated but people still have fun playing it, the refusal to acknowledge that fact is one of the reasons that people are labeled as "haters" or "whingers" because they always push it to the extreme in stating that it is *too* bloated or *too* clunky to be playable at all.
People occasionally have fun playing lots of bad games. That doesn't make them good games.
Yes it does. The point of a game is for the players to have fun. If they do this, that game is objectively good, regardless of whatever arbitrary criteria you might hold it up to. You are of course free to analyse and critisise a game when compared to other games and point out what you perceive its failings to be, but that doesn't make your opinion any better or worse's than any others.
If I design a game where you and I flip a coin each - if I flip a heads I win, if you flip a heads or tails you still lose. Clearly we won't enjoy or play this game, therefore I would consider it objectively bad. People aren't stupid (well I'm not sure about that), they wouldn't sit around playing 40k if they weren't enjoying themselves. And since they are enjoying themselves, it's a successful game.
Incidentally I feel this way about plenty of things that I regard as crap. The Sims has outsold Europa Universalis a billion times over, yet I still consider it utter trash. And yet, due to its popularity, I have to acknowledge that it is a successful and good game. Ditto how way more people will watch Lee Evans than Charlie Brooker, despite me having risible contempt for the former. And yet millions of people will tune in to watch him, so again on some level I have to acknowledge a talent there.
To use some video game examples:
ET on the Atari is not a good game, though enjoyment can be had when playing it (or maybe watching other people play and get more and more infuriated).
Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing is not a good game, though you can have fun playing it (just seeing all the different ways to break it).
Superman 64 is not a good game but yet again you can have fun playing it (just to marvel at how bad and dull it is. Flying through hoops...YAY!).
Or maybe a notorious film example:
The Star Wars Holiday Special is awful. It goes beyond "so-bad-it's-good". Yet this can also provide some enjoyment when viewed in the right context. It's just that the context is not, at all, what the creators intended.
So you can have fun despite things being objectively bad. Having fun does not make something good. It just means that you can have fun playing something bad.
And, more importantly, people don't have fun because the 40k rules are good, they have fun despite the 40k rules being awful. People enjoy the setting and the models and that's enough to enjoy playing a game, but the rules make it a lot less fun than it could be. Replace the current game with one that doesn't suck and most people would have a lot more fun playing it.
Nate668 wrote: The 40k community here on Dakka is decidedly toxic.
I just got back into League of Legends a couple weeks ago. You want to see a toxic community, go play that game for like a day and then come back and tell us how awful Dakka really is.
Nate668 wrote: The reason you (if you find yourself in the haters camp) hate 40k is because you want it to be something that it is not. 40k is not a competitive ruleset. 40k is a beer and pretzels, casual, lets-get-together-and-put-some-awesome-models-on-the-table-and-roll-some-dice-and-see-what-happens kind of game.
Then it costs too much for what it is. If the aim is to produce a strictly casual, "beer and pretzels" game and atmosphere then they're shooting themselves in the foot because they've priced it too far out of reach of the casual gamer they're targeting. Blood Bowl was a good, casual, "beer and pretzels" type of game: really fun, albeit random gameplay but with minimal investment. GW armies cost so much more in comparison that you really can't justify the expense if you're not going to take the game seriously. It would be like forking out cash for a top-tier competitive Magic deck and then strictly playing newbies on your kitchen table, while mocking people who do participate in the pro Magic scene for taking the game too seriously.
If what you say is true then GW clearly doesn't know what it wants to be. It wants to be a casual game, but demands $800+ for a single army, an investment that is decidedly not casual. It wants people to stop taking the rules seriously, but then charges the better part of $100 for the core rulebook and $50 for every codex, supplement, and expansion, which is at least twice as expensive as it's closest competitor (who actually does cater to the gamer craving balanced play or, god forbid, competition). GW says one thing and does another.
Nate668 wrote: TL;DR: Bitching on Dakka does nothing to change GW. If you hate 40k because you are a competitive gamer, check out something else (like Warmahordes), like I did. You may find that, like me, in a couple years you will appreciate 40k for what it actually is, instead of hating it for not being what you wish it was. Or you may find that you still hate GW, and if so, perhaps forums that are primarily focused on 40k are not for you.
Dakka is not 40k-focused and hasn't been for quite some time now. Being a 40k fan or pro-GW is not a requirement for posting here.
Hollismason wrote: I don't hate companies, because they're companies. Their job is to make money. I disagree with all of their business practices.
I think that's the big disconnect people have is that they personalize it with GW to the point of being able to "hate" them, and that's kind of emotionally silly.
Well, for what it's worth the US Supreme Court just ruled in the Hobby Lobby case that companies are people, so...
Seriously, sad times we live in now.
bullyboy wrote: it's not GW that makes 40K generally a poor game, it's the player base.
Wrong.
bullyboy wrote: They abuse the freedom that is provided. Daemonology is a perfect example. It's a great idea to introduce this into 40K, especially with the dark nature of the 40K universe, but then the player base has to find a way to get 30+ summoning dice available. That's the player, not the game. Beastmaster with beasts, how about maybe 5 beasts with your beastmaster? No, player base wants 20+ of them. Etc, etc.
Eldar players told to spam wave serpents with minimal DA sqds inside. OK, aspect warriors in wave serpents are a fluffy feature, but you know the serpent can carry 12 models right?
And it doesn't sound silly at all to you to blame the player for all these instances that the game allows? Why is it even possible to get 30+ summoning dice if you're not "supposed" to, or doing so goes against the "spirit of the game", or whatever other argument you can come up with? Same for all other examples, why am I allowed to take up to 20 fething beasts if I'm technically not "supposed" to? Why can I stuff a mere 5 troops into a transport if I'm "supposed" to pack it as full as possible (which you realize would now cost an Eldar player over $70 to do PER TRANSPORT, right?)? What's the purpose of this freedom if you're not really expected to take advantage of it in the first place, and doing so actually goes against the wishes of the game designers?
bullyboy wrote: GW has made the ruleset and the codices pretty flexible (overly so) so that many odd combos can be played to cover the 40K 'verse, and small units allowed so that players can play 500pt games with a mix of units. But it's the player base that has created most of the angst that is associated with the game. There are more TFG than you probably think and you may well be one of them. Hate GW as much as you wish, but first figure out what is truly ruining the game.
GW's rules and attitude are ruining the game. Your attitude is ruining the game. You shouldn't be attacking other players and accusing them of wrong-doing, you should be holding GW accountable for the crap they allow and put into the game for the sole purpose of extorting more money out of the fanbase.
If minimum-sized squads were only intended to be taken in smaller games as you imply, then GW could easily incorporate that into the rules. They could set requirements for squad sizes based on several, popular points levels. 500 points you're limited to 5, no more, no less. 1000+ you need to take 10, minimum. Easy. Do this for every unit choice for every army and hey, you might actually start to have something resembling a balanced game. As far as summoning dice goes, that sounds like an oversight by the games development team, one that wasn't picked up on because of poor/inefficient testing, one that the fanbase managed to figure out pretty quickly because, unlike the people who are paid to do this for a living, they knew what they were doing. There's really no reason why taking 20 beasts, five troops in a transport or an army based around demon summoning should be a bad thing, other than GW are idiots and made it that way. If they made even a small effort to balance the game all that freedom would actually mean something and 40k might actually be fun to play again, but as it is it's entirely pointless since there are so many unwritten rules and restriction put in place by the fanbase that having the freedom to play any kind of list you want really doesn't mean jack gak in the end.
It isn't the players that are ruining the game, it's GW's laid-back attitude in regards to game design and lack of interest in "fixing" the game post-release...unless they can figure out how to make you pay for it, of course.
Deadnight wrote: What we have with 40k is self policing via social control, negative stigmatisation and group pressure. Bullying by other words. if anything, this attitude leads to even more resentment within the player base.
Pretty much this. I've felt that way for years myself, that 40k players are essentially bullies, and it's one of many things that's helped to drive me out of it.
KommissarKarl wrote: Yes it's clunky and way too bloated but people still have fun playing it, the refusal to acknowledge that fact is one of the reasons that people are labeled as "haters" or "whingers" because they always push it to the extreme in stating that it is *too* bloated or *too* clunky to be playable at all.
People occasionally have fun playing lots of bad games. That doesn't make them good games.
Yes it does. The point of a game is for the players to have fun. If they do this, that game is objectively good, regardless of whatever arbitrary criteria you might hold it up to. You are of course free to analyse and critisise a game when compared to other games and point out what you perceive its failings to be, but that doesn't make your opinion any better or worse's than any others.
If I design a game where you and I flip a coin each - if I flip a heads I win, if you flip a heads or tails you still lose. Clearly we won't enjoy or play this game, therefore I would consider it objectively bad. People aren't stupid (well I'm not sure about that), they wouldn't sit around playing 40k if they weren't enjoying themselves. And since they are enjoying themselves, it's a successful game.
Incidentally I feel this way about plenty of things that I regard as crap. The Sims has outsold Europa Universalis a billion times over, yet I still consider it utter trash. And yet, due to its popularity, I have to acknowledge that it is a successful and good game. Ditto how way more people will watch Lee Evans than Charlie Brooker, despite me having risible contempt for the former. And yet millions of people will tune in to watch him, so again on some level I have to acknowledge a talent there.
To use some video game examples:
ET on the Atari is not a good game, though enjoyment can be had when playing it (or maybe watching other people play and get more and more infuriated).
Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing is not a good game, though you can have fun playing it (just seeing all the different ways to break it).
Superman 64 is not a good game but yet again you can have fun playing it (just to marvel at how bad and dull it is. Flying through hoops...YAY!).
Or maybe a notorious film example:
The Star Wars Holiday Special is awful. It goes beyond "so-bad-it's-good". Yet this can also provide some enjoyment when viewed in the right context. It's just that the context is not, at all, what the creators intended.
So you can have fun despite things being objectively bad. Having fun does not make something good. It just means that you can have fun playing something bad.
Your examples might hold some weight if they'd dominated the video games industry for 20 years. If that's all your proof that 40k is objectively bad...hell I could do better than that
So the point of this thread is .....the way to enjoy the game is to just chill out man...its just a game, stop asking questions and be happy with the way things are.
Thanks for sharing your story Nate668. It's always interesting to hear people's reflections on their experiences. It's certainly true that taking a break from something allows you to approach it with a fresh perspective.
Unfortunately, it's been my experience that it's impossible to convince people of the epiphany. This goes for everything, not just games of toy soldiers. People either have to discover it for themselves or follow a different path. It's the different experiences and paths we follow that make people such a diverse bunch and I think we are stronger for it.
I find it disheartening that most threads on here seem to turn towards criticising GW. I think Nate668's shared frustration prompted him to refer to the community at "toxic". Don't get me wrong. I think the criticism is important but it would sometimes be nice to reat and chat about the positive aspects too.
I think a lot of people agree. There seem to be a lot of recent threads such as this one along the lines of "why all the GW hate?". These seem to turn quickly to criticising GW, the rules or the models. More successful ones (in terms of keeping away from criticism) seem to go along the lines of "share a cool story" .
I've felt that way for years myself, that 40k players are essentially bullies, and it's one of many things that's helped to drive me out of it.
Hmm. I wonder if it's at all possible, that sometimes the 'issue" is not GW?
It's really as if we're in a different (and less grimdark) universe. We play with pleasant people, get tabled occasionally, play in tournaments... never have we had to blame GW for problems with other people.
Nate668 wrote: The 40k community here on Dakka is decidedly toxic.
I just got back into League of Legends a couple weeks ago. You want to see a toxic community, go play that game for like a day and then come back and tell us how awful Dakka really is.
Sexual harassment for days... Really the way to deal with them is to bring your own community at times.
Anway blind hatred is as bad as blind praise is. You can disapprove of the decissions they take without actually being a "hater", it's called reasoning. Also when referring to a community the buzz word toxic is generally considered toxic.
A loose collection of things I'm not quite impressed with which some will see as hating, really those would need to take a step back and get some fresh air. - Constant increases in price for products in general, but some specific cases such as the SoB 10 pack which here imcreased from if I remember correctly something like $50 --> $72 over the course of a couple of years. I understand a full metal monopose army has to be more expensive somehow, but that progressively made it more annoying. I'm not going to mention the lack of model updates that range has seen. - Annoying repackages, more recent example is the Dire Avengers box. Basically take the same kit they've been producing for a while, cut down the models in it and sell it at the same price. Catachan and Orks had also seen this, but the most annoying were probably the DA and the SoB which are blister exclusive. All of which is a stealth price increase which really wasn't even required when it could have recieved a smaller increase with the rest of their ranges while containing the same amount. I understand the move to the ten man boxes, but moving some of those to five just seems like a cheap money grab.
-The Embargo, they were still getting my money; in fact they were getting more of it over time than they do now.
-One man store / word of mouth.
-Marine codex saturation. What about chapters such as the Iron Hands rather than BA, DA, or SW some of which seemed to have last minute stuff pushed into it to try to justify not being a supliment.
They have done some things I do like such as the Wraithguard update, the Wraithknight model I also like. I also sort of like the LoW system, but as sort of a bridge between normal 40k and full apocalypse units.
Long time 40k gamer here and said this many different ways but really want to address what the OP says.
For "pick-up" games 40k is unsuitable since there is no real good way to ensure a balanced scrap.
Not really an option there.
People still say to me "I followed the rules in the book so you have to accept my army!" really false assumption it is balanced.
For my friends who are less... competitive, it is a great sandbox or rules to play pretty much whatever we want... we do forge the narrative.
So I really fall in the camp of 40k does what I need.
I also have way too much models from GW to just plain rage quit if they do things I do not like (which there are many), let me repeat: quitting is not an option, too... much... invested.
If I was a new player, BRB, codex and army to buy = no freaking way.
(BRB = $100, Codex Space Marine = $70, Space Marine Strike Force = $270, Total $440 not including tax).
BattleTech Introductory Box Set = $39.99
X-wing, Core Game = $39.95
Warmachine two player battlebox = $100
To be fair, Dark Vengeance is listed on Amazon for $100 (not on GW web site) but you still need to spend an extra $170 if going with Dark Angels or CSM with 7th ed rules. = $270
Battletech I got the most value for the money.
Yes, 40k, friends, pretzels: good times.
But I am a gamer, I like competition, GW still does a good job of masking things into making you think this is a great competitive game until it is too late.
It bears saying again "40k is like an RPG for lots of little miniatures, could look at it as a larger quantity game of their Inquisition warband type game."
I must admit that since the game IS so unbalanced and relies so heavily on luck that many epic improbable things have happened that can be quite memorable.
If someone takes their 40k very serious, back away slowly and hope some day they figure it out.
If you meet a new person thinking of getting into the game tell them "Unless a relative is giving you their army, run, run now while you can still leave!"
Hmm. I wonder if it's at all possible, that sometimes the 'issue" is not GW?
It's really as if we're in a different (and less grimdark) universe. We play with pleasant people, get tabled occasionally, play in tournaments... never have we had to blame GW for problems with other people.
People aren't blaming GW for their problems with people, they're blaming GW for their problems with the game. Two distinct aspects at play here.
People can ruin your experience regardless of the game you play. That's the player's fault; their general attitude and such.
The game can ruin your experience despite an excellent opponent. That's the game's fault; poor rule wording and bad balance may be factors.
These issues can compound, but it doesn't absolve GW of poor game design if you happen to just play against a poor sport. Make sure you're making the distinction, as they're two different problems with entirely different solutions.
Talizvar wrote: If you meet a new person thinking of getting into the game tell them "Unless a relative is giving you their army, run, run now while you can still leave!"
Haha, coincidence.
The only reason I got into WH40k was because I got Assault on Black Reach for 20 euro and I saw some nice deals on our local "eBay".
rayphoton wrote: So the point of this thread is .....the way to enjoy the game is to just chill out man...its just a game, stop asking questions and be happy with the way things are.
The government loves people who are like that.
And therefore that makes me nervous.
I have to admit I too have lain awake at night worrying that people who like 40K might usher in the zombie apocalypse or CCTV or universal health care or something.
rayphoton wrote: So the point of this thread is .....the way to enjoy the game is to just chill out man...its just a game, stop asking questions and be happy with the way things are.
The government loves people who are like that.
And therefore that makes me nervous.
I have to admit I too have lain awake at night worrying that people who like 40K might usher in the zombie apocalypse or CCTV or universal health care or something.
Yes, the cameras my department has in KK's bedroom can confirm the veracity of this statement.
dresnar1 wrote: There is a cure for my GW hate. GW can fire Jervis "the moron" Jhonson. GW can write a competent ruleset. That is the cure.
When you're making disparaging remarks about someone, maybe take the time to spell their name correctly to avoid making yourself look just as silly?
In the meantime, I would recommend reviewing Dakka's rule #1. The name calling just because someone worked on a game that you're not thrilled with is uneccessary. We're talking about toy soldiers here.
The reason you (if you find yourself in the haters camp) hate 40k is because you want it to be something that it is not. 40k is not a competitive ruleset. 40k is a beer and pretzels, casual, lets-get-together-and-put-some-awesome-models-on-the-table-and-roll-some-dice-and-see-what-happens kind of game. It sucks that GW used to attempt to cater to the competitive player and no longer does, but that's how it is, and bitching on Dakka isn't going to change it. If you're unhappy with 40k, move on to a new system to scratch your competitive itch.
.
I want the game to reflect the fluff. Wheres your argument now?
This said, a fair number of replies from many of the senior Dakka members seem to have shown your view to be skewed and in fact has improved my opinion of the Dakka horde.
dresnar1 wrote: There is a cure for my GW hate. GW can fire Jervis "the moron" Jhonson. GW can write a competent ruleset. That is the cure.
When you're making disparaging remarks about someone, maybe take the time to spell their name correctly to avoid making yourself look just as silly?
In the meantime, I would recommend reviewing Dakka's rule #1. The name calling just because someone worked on a game that you're not thrilled with is uneccessary. We're talking about toy soldiers here.
This said, a fair number of replies from many of the senior Dakka members seem to have shown your view to be skewed and in fact has improved my opinion of the Dakka horde.
I fail to see the point of this post. The poster does not even state which of my views are skewed.
That said, a fair number of replies from many senior Dakka members that actually contribute something to the thread are much less useless than this post.
The bottom line is: A game company should be in touch with their player base. And from what I've gathered, GW doesn't do this. They don't seek out customer feedback, they don't utilize it to help improve what could be a vastly superior game to every other tabletop game out there...IF they would put the time into doing so. Look at what Sakurai is doing with Smash Bros. He held a tournament, had players TELL him and the team what they thought of it so far, and what they were expecting/wanting. If he uses this feedback to its fullest, the new Smash Brothers game could be the best one to date. THATS what GW should be doing. Figuring out what players think, and how to improve.
But they don't. People have the right to complain, they have given the company money, and in most cases a LOT of money. No one likes to see what they have collected over the years become worthless because the company screwed over their Codex or made shoddy rules that put their army in the lowest quadrants of mundane.
But, I went into this game knowing this. Knowing the company could screw me. But, I went the smart route, and chose to give the company my money, ONLY when I felt it was worth it to do so. I've bought all my models, with the exclusion of my Morkanaught, second hand or from an online retailer/ebay. I love this game, which was why I wanted to put money into it. It's a sad shame I couldn't find the justification in supporting the company directly outside of Codex releases because I don't feel they will put my money to a better use.
Wizkids did the same thing with Heroclix. They started out strong, but over time, really started to feth with the players. It made people upset. And they have recently begun to pull out of it, though they still had flubs here or there (Mostly distribution set backs or errors). It's frustrating, but at least they are TRYING to do better. And thats the whole difference. Wizkids is trying. GW doesn't seem to be trying at all.
Will I stop playing 40k? No, not until every local player I've got ends up stopping. But I'll end up keeping my models, maybe even buying more (second hand) to keep my army looking cool and expand. GW has a great product...they just need to listen to us some more...make this game a 'must play' by wargamers everywhere.
Melevolence wrote: The bottom line is: A game company should be in touch with their player base. And from what I've gathered, GW doesn't do this. They don't seek out customer feedback, they don't utilize it to help improve what could be a vastly superior game to every other tabletop game out there...IF they would put the time into doing so. Look at what Sakurai is doing with Smash Bros. He held a tournament, had players TELL him and the team what they thought of it so far, and what they were expecting/wanting. If he uses this feedback to its fullest, the new Smash Brothers game could be the best one to date. THATS what GW should be doing. Figuring out what players think, and how to improve.
But they don't. People have the right to complain, they have given the company money, and in most cases a LOT of money. No one likes to see what they have collected over the years become worthless because the company screwed over their Codex or made shoddy rules that put their army in the lowest quadrants of mundane.
But, I went into this game knowing this. Knowing the company could screw me. But, I went the smart route, and chose to give the company my money, ONLY when I felt it was worth it to do so. I've bought all my models, with the exclusion of my Morkanaught, second hand or from an online retailer/ebay. I love this game, which was why I wanted to put money into it. It's a sad shame I couldn't find the justification in supporting the company directly outside of Codex releases because I don't feel they will put my money to a better use.
Wizkids did the same thing with Heroclix. They started out strong, but over time, really started to feth with the players. It made people upset. And they have recently begun to pull out of it, though they still had flubs here or there (Mostly distribution set backs or errors). It's frustrating, but at least they are TRYING to do better. And thats the whole difference. Wizkids is trying. GW doesn't seem to be trying at all.
Will I stop playing 40k? No, not until every local player I've got ends up stopping. But I'll end up keeping my models, maybe even buying more (second hand) to keep my army looking cool and expand. GW has a great product...they just need to listen to us some more...make this game a 'must play' by wargamers everywhere.
Pretty much this. In our current age and methods of communication being so accessible and easy to use it boggles my mind how walled in GW is. It is as if they are still living in the early to mid 90's. I will keep playing 40k with the one army i have chosen to keep and in the years to come if they get their act together I will gladly reinvest in a new army.
His name is Jervis Johnson not Jhonson. Also, it's rude to call someone a moron. I doubt that JJ is making the high-impact decisions, he's just doing his job.
His name is Jervis Johnson not Jhonson. Also, it's rude to call someone a moron. I doubt that JJ is making the high-impact decisions, he's just doing his job.
He is the head of the rules department!!! I mean, he is the last line, the grand puba, the chief of GW rules. You read his spots in GW and you see his game design philosophy all over GW games rules. His intros in WD refer to him as a Rules Genius sometimes!!! Don't apologize for Jervis Johnson. He is the one at fault, its OK to blame him.
I don't believe calling a spade a spade is rude. If you do, that's fine. If I don't that is also fine. I will, however, respect the forum rules now that they have been pointed out to me.
dresnar1 wrote: He is the head of the rules department!!! I mean, he is the last line, the grand puba, the chief of GW rules. You read his spots in GW and you see his game design philosophy all over GW games rules. His intros in WD refer to him as a Rules Genius sometimes!!! Don't apologize for Jervis Johnson. He is the one at fault, its OK to blame him.
What he is not, however, is the guy who makes the financial decisions.
We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
I don't believe calling a spade a spade is rude. If you do, that's fine. If I don't that is also fine. I will, however, respect the forum rules now that they have been pointed out to me.
Believing it to be true doesn't make an insult any less rude.
dresnar1 wrote: He is the head of the rules department!!! I mean, he is the last line, the grand puba, the chief of GW rules. You read his spots in GW and you see his game design philosophy all over GW games rules. His intros in WD refer to him as a Rules Genius sometimes!!! Don't apologize for Jervis Johnson. He is the one at fault, its OK to blame him.
What he is not, however, is the guy who makes the financial decisions.
We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
I don't believe calling a spade a spade is rude. If you do, that's fine. If I don't that is also fine. I will, however, respect the forum rules now that they have been pointed out to me.
Believing it to be true doesn't make an insult any less rude.
So you're saying that the guy who coined the phrase "forge a narrative", believes that games are best when played with a games master, prefers random charts over strategic play (read his articles), removed rules for terrain in exchange for true line of sight, has nothing to do with the game as it currently is?
When will GW apologists wake up? Who is this mystery person you believe is screwing up the game if it isn't Jervis Johnson? Let me tell you, it is Jervis Johnson. Read the guys articles, he spells out his game theory and its on the level of an eight year old.
You feel calling something what it is an insult, the name is appropriate, a perfect use of the word. If you liked something you would rather pretend its something other than the turd it has become rather than face the truth about what is going on and confront it. I find that insulting.
I always thought that jervis guy was just a face. A guy who just justifies the rules and takes the flak etc. While dont doubt he has a lot to do with the rules, he probably just does what those in charge want done but he has to figure the best way of doing it.
I think most people who work probably understand that. I have produced some truly ugly stuff in my time because of the guy above me. Not my intention or will, im just after my pay like Jervis is.
While I wouldn't go so far as to imply insaniak is an apologist or break rule #1 I don't think JJ should be allowed near any ruleset. I don't have the proper reference material in front of me but in the lead up to 7th he was talking in WD about his idea of how a game should be played. Both players discuss why their armies are fighting and what their objectives are. They then roll some dice and at the end discuss which side won. If they can't agree its q draw. That is what he thinks makes a great game.
After reading that I simply can't respect the man in his current role.
Jervis seems to be quite intelligent to me, but comes across as vacillating and tired. He's a company man caught in the GW maelstrom, and as Insaniak said any authority he has comes from above. His lifeless intros to 7th Ed. seemed to me like he knew full well the underlying consequences of 'unbound' and other changes in the game but whether or not he agrees with the game's direction, he still is a professional doing/keeping his job. Who knows what he'll say once he leaves the company, but until then he will tow the party line.
I too skimmed those Jervis articles prior to 7E. I read a few lines out loud to the folks in ear shot and they stopped playing their board game to go "Uh... what?"
While I couldn't call the man a moron because I don't know him, he seems awfully pretentious in his work and has an air of smug about him that's not to my liking. Budget, time crunch, and more can make a rushed product and I don't think everything wrong with the game lays at his feet. However, seeing as almost all the other big names in the rules department have left and started their own endeavors, I would seem to think that the last thing floating in the punch bowl might be the turd.
I'd disagree. Jervis worked with Rick Priestly on Black Powder, and you can see in that ruleset what the guy can do when he's out from underneath the obviously crushing influence of GW.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
Agreed. Even if he's not solely responsible, he encourages it.
infinite_array wrote: I'd disagree. Jervis worked with Rick Priestly on Black Powder, and you can see in that ruleset what the guy can do when he's out from underneath the obviously crushing influence of GW.
Then he should leave. Otherwise, he will be viewed as part of the problem. Since he remains, and from his writing in the White Dwarf, I feel my point is closer to the truth of the situation.
infinite_array wrote: I'd disagree. Jervis worked with Rick Priestly on Black Powder, and you can see in that ruleset what the guy can do when he's out from underneath the obviously crushing influence of GW.
I agree, Black Powder happens to be an actual "Beer and Pretzels" game, unlike 40k which is really a bloated skirmish game. In a funny irony I think Jervis has the same problem as many of us "Haters" on Dakka, 40k isn't the game he or us wants. For 40k to be the B&P narrative forging game Jervis wants it would require a major rewrite.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
But this is the issue. He's doing exactly what his bosses instruct. You can call him a spineless thrall, but that isn't any basis for termination if that's precisely what his masters want. They want him to put a spin on whatever crap they throw down the pipe. Honestly, if he stood up to the big wigs he'd probably be sacked already.
dresnar1 wrote: So you're saying that the guy who coined the phrase "forge a narrative", believes that games are best when played with a games master, prefers random charts over strategic play (read his articles), removed rules for terrain in exchange for true line of sight, has nothing to do with the game as it currently is?
No. You can tell that I'm not saying that by the fact that I didn't say it.
It's certainly entirely likely that Jervis is responsible for the current direction of the game, although even that could potentially be a result of the bean counters saying 'Make the game more like this!' and Jervis just toeing the company line, for all we know.
What I said was simply that we don't have enough information to pin the current state of the game solely on Jervis.
When will GW apologists wake up?
Yup, GW apologist, that's me to a T.
Who is this mystery person you believe is screwing up the game if it isn't Jervis Johnson?
In any large company, any given department is to some degree at the mercy of the company's financial department.
However well intentioned the studio guys may be, if they're only given a limited time frame in which to churn out a codex, because Finance has given them a limited timeframe and a specified release window to work with, then you're not likely to get their best work.
Let me tell you, it is Jervis Johnson. Read the guys articles, he spells out his game theory and its on the level of an eight year old.
Final warning for this sort of statement. If you can not make your point in a civil fashion, your ability to participate in discussions on this forum will be removed.
You feel calling something what it is an insult, the name is appropriate, a perfect use of the word. If you liked something you would rather pretend its something other than the turd it has become rather than face the truth about what is going on and confront it. I find that insulting.
Yup, I'm totally happy with the current state of the game. You'll never hear a complaint pass my lips.
Or something.
My disagreement with you is nothing to do with thinking that the game doesn't have problems. I simply disagreed with your claim that one person is single-handedly responsible for it, on the basis of a singular lack of evidence that this is actually the case.
Nate668 wrote: I fail to see the point of this post. The poster does not even state which of my views are skewed.
There's no need. Your post falls over with its first sentence because it's very premise is incorrect.
In your opinion.
In some other folks' opinions, there has been too much whining and too many fruitless discussions about how gakky things are in the world of GW games. One opinion may be more common on Dakka, but I guarantee that neither is objectively "correct" or "incorrect," and to insist otherwise would be pretty foolish.
After reading that I simply can't respect the man in his current role.
He has produced some excellent rulesets in the past, he did after all create Blood Bowl and he was one of the key designers during GW's golden age. He does appear to have become a yes man although really can produce good rulesets. We also don't know what kind of pressures the design studio are under (I suspect quite a lot) to result in such badly tested and ill conceived rules.
I suspect that Jervis Johnson only has a minor role in the design studio's disappointing output over the last decade but as he is the public face and apparently really happy about everything its understandable that he will get flak.
This said, a fair number of replies from many of the senior Dakka members seem to have shown your view to be skewed and in fact has improved my opinion of the Dakka horde.
I fail to see the point of this post. The poster does not even state which of my views are skewed.
That said, a fair number of replies from many senior Dakka members that actually contribute something to the thread are much less useless than this post.
Through posting this sarcastic post, you have shown yourself as an example of the bitter, spite filled individuals you profess to despise in your original post.
*shrugs*
Again, I don't see the point in writing a broadly insulting post aimed at a community you are in, followed by paragraphs where you attempt to 'teach them' what they should be doing. I assume you're not qualified as an educator (and even if you were, you're certainly not qualified to do it on this site).
I suggest you get down off your high horse - you may then realize the irony of your original post
dresnar1 wrote: So you're saying that the guy who coined the phrase "forge a narrative", believes that games are best when played with a games master, prefers random charts over strategic play (read his articles), removed rules for terrain in exchange for true line of sight, has nothing to do with the game as it currently is?
No. You can tell that I'm not saying that by the fact that I didn't say it.
It's certainly entirely likely that Jervis is responsible for the current direction of the game, although even that could potentially be a result of the bean counters saying 'Make the game more like this!' and Jervis just toeing the company line, for all we know.
What I said was simply that we don't have enough information to pin the current state of the game solely on Jervis.
When will GW apologists wake up?
Yup, GW apologist, that's me to a T.
Who is this mystery person you believe is screwing up the game if it isn't Jervis Johnson?
In any large company, any given department is to some degree at the mercy of the company's financial department.
However well intentioned the studio guys may be, if they're only given a limited time frame in which to churn out a codex, because Finance has given them a limited timeframe and a specified release window to work with, then you're not likely to get their best work.
Let me tell you, it is Jervis Johnson. Read the guys articles, he spells out his game theory and its on the level of an eight year old.
Final warning for this sort of statement. If you can not make your point in a civil fashion, your ability to participate in discussions on this forum will be removed.
You feel calling something what it is an insult, the name is appropriate, a perfect use of the word. If you liked something you would rather pretend its something other than the turd it has become rather than face the truth about what is going on and confront it. I find that insulting.
Yup, I'm totally happy with the current state of the game. You'll never hear a complaint pass my lips.
Or something.
My disagreement with you is nothing to do with thinking that the game doesn't have problems. I simply disagreed with your claim that one person is single-handedly responsible for it, on the basis of a singular lack of evidence that this is actually the case.
We have evidence of Jervis Johnsons game design theory. We have articles with his giant head beside them with his signature on the bottom of them. We have YEARS of these articles. We can read those articles and see that Jervis has, since before 5th edition, championed a style of game design. That style of game design has become apparent in the current version of 40k and fantasy.
Here is what we don't have evidence of. A mysterious accountant that somehow controls the all the departments at GW and makes the game worse for the player base year after year.
Producing a product and running a company is a team effort. I'm not saying Jervis is responsible for the over priced models, the absence of the company on social media, their legal attacks on competitors and fans, their disinterest in their customers, or many of the other poor business decisions GW makes. I'm saying Jervis is all about forging the narrative (read HIS articles), loves true line of sight (read HIS articles), thinks competitive play is bad for the game (read HIS articles), believes a game master makes the game better (read HIS articles), thinks random chats determining the out come of the game is more fun than strategy and tactics (read HIS articles), feels random charge distances lead to a more exciting game (read HIS articles), believes rules should be changed at will and agreed to by opponents before the game starts rather than clearly defined rules that both sides can adhere to (read HIS articles), ect, ect. All these things Jervis Johnson is on the record promoting as good ideas well BEFORE their inclusion in the current edition.
I don't have a problem with you. I don't post here enough to know the ins and outs of who the cool kids are here on Dakka and what their positions are. When you choose to ignore the evidence (Jervis Johnsons extensive body of articles) and choose to believe in some insidious force for which there is no evidence and that that mystery person is the culprit for what ails the game then I can only conclude that you are choosing to put on blinders and not see things for what they are. If Jervis Johnson goes away GW games will get better. Until then GW games will be the same drivel they are now.
TLDR;
Most of what players complain about concerning design issues in current versions of GW games can be found being championed in articles by Jervis Johnson well before the release of the current versions of the game. Jervis Johnson is head of the rules department. Jervis Johnson has the most influence over the rules being written for GW games. There is no need to look any further for someone to blame for the current state of rules for GW games than Jervis Johnson (as the evidence shows, read HIS articles!!!)
I find having risen to this bait a few times that the majority of the posts I see is:
"I see much negativity to GW/40k, it makes me unhappy. You should learn to suck it up princess. If not, you should rage-quit and give away all your toys (I would find it amusing). BTW I find your lack of perspective with man-toys very amusing in the most condescending of ways - get a life."
Can we list this officially as trolling?
The "negativity" posts seem to have the most negativity of disrespecting people's opinion and constructive criticism.
I have seen so many variations of my above paraphrase (that I find oddly offensive even having written it).
These posts are neither asking for "enlightenment" or offering solutions, just a means to get into personal attacks and argument.
Nate668 wrote: I fail to see the point of this post. The poster does not even state which of my views are skewed.
There's no need. Your post falls over with its first sentence because it's very premise is incorrect.
In your opinion.
In some other folks' opinions, there has been too much whining and too many fruitless discussions about how gakky things are in the world of GW games. One opinion may be more common on Dakka, but I guarantee that neither is objectively "correct" or "incorrect," and to insist otherwise would be pretty foolish.
Maybe if there wasn't so darned much to complain about there would be less complaining?
I say, let GW defend themselves. They're like the Venetian Republic at the end. They're so caught up in the minutiae of what they like doing that they ignore the outside world and fail to see that the big picture has turned against them.
"Update our galleys to galleons? Why bother? Our galleys have worked for 1,500 years! No need to change what's always worked. We're the best traders in the Mediterranean! What's this 'New World' nonsense? It's just a passing fad."
Talizvar wrote: I find having risen to this bait a few times that the majority of the posts I see is:
"I see much negativity to GW/40k, it makes me unhappy. You should learn to suck it up princess. If not, you should rage-quit and give away all your toys (I would find it amusing). BTW I find your lack of perspective with man-toys very amusing in the most condescending of ways - get a life."
Can we list this officially as trolling?
The "negativity" posts seem to have the most negativity of disrespecting people's opinion and constructive criticism.
I have seen so many variations of my above paraphrase (that I find oddly offensive even having written it).
These posts are neither asking for "enlightenment" or offering solutions, just a means to get into personal attacks and argument.
Cure for GW hate: apathy. done.
You need to think of it in terms of a support group. You still enjoy the game so you shouldn't read the complaints. For example if you never had cancer and went to a cancer support group I doubt all the negativity would appeal to you. Those of us that have grown with the game over decades and are very unhappy with what is happening find some solace in complaining about the state of our beloved hobby.
My advice to you is if you don't want to read negative posts then don't. Trying to designate those of us that are unhappy with the game (and there are ALOT of us) as trolls is just silly. If there are negative posts about the game move on. You don't need to participate. We that are posting negative comments do gain some satisfaction from doing so.
For me I walk past my hobby case and have to shake my head. After awhile the rage builds up and I come here to vent my disapproval. I feel much better later. Then the cycle repeats.
Talizvar wrote: I find having risen to this bait a few times that the majority of the posts I see is:
"I see much negativity to GW/40k, it makes me unhappy. You should learn to suck it up princess. If not, you should rage-quit and give away all your toys (I would find it amusing). BTW I find your lack of perspective with man-toys very amusing in the most condescending of ways - get a life."
Can we list this officially as trolling?
The "negativity" posts seem to have the most negativity of disrespecting people's opinion and constructive criticism.
I have seen so many variations of my above paraphrase (that I find oddly offensive even having written it).
Er, yes. The people who defend GW are the real trolls, otherwise why would they object to the vilification of GW staff as "liars ", "corporate whores" and "8 year olds," the description of anyone who plays 40k as "bullies" or the (especially delicious) theorising that 40k promotes eugenics and nazi ideals. Anyone who gets depressed by this infantile stream of conspiracist claptrap must plainly be a company stooge.
1.) Sold 22 years of GW stuff on ebay. All I have is four marines left that I use for painting/stripping/repainting for developing model color schemes.
2.) Bought into Hell Dorado for my fantasy fix.
3.) Heavily bought into Infinity for my sci-fi fix ($6,500 spent in less than three days which is still $2,500 less than what I got for all my GW stuff on ebay).
Played quite a few games of the two games mentioned above and realized just how very bad GW rules systems are. Getting out of GW was the beast thing for me as I am actually enjoying the hobby again and having fun, yet challenging, games.
Honestly, for me, even if they were to drop their prices by 90% I won't be going back. They have truly become a bunch of hacks compared to their competition.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Talizvar wrote: I find having risen to this bait a few times that the majority of the posts I see is:
"I see much negativity to GW/40k, it makes me unhappy. You should learn to suck it up princess. If not, you should rage-quit and give away all your toys (I would find it amusing). BTW I find your lack of perspective with man-toys very amusing in the most condescending of ways - get a life."
Can we list this officially as trolling?
The "negativity" posts seem to have the most negativity of disrespecting people's opinion and constructive criticism.
I have seen so many variations of my above paraphrase (that I find oddly offensive even having written it).
Er, yes. The people who defend GW are the real trolls, otherwise why would they object to the vilification of GW staff as "liars ", "corporate whores" and "8 year olds," the description of anyone who plays 40k as "bullies" or the (especially delicious) theorising that 40k promotes eugenics and nazi ideals. Anyone who gets depressed by this infantile stream of conspiracist claptrap must plainly be a company stooge.
What I find galling is that nonsense like this is the reason GW shut down their own forums and facebook page. It seems like the same people who relentlessly stoke up and exagerate nonsense got them closed down, are the same people who complain about GW not communicating with your fanbase. It's like being in a phonecall with someone, giving them a relentless endless stream of abuse, and then complaining when the other person hangs up that they don't want to talk to you.
Every other company manages to get by with whatever levels of hate. If GW was getting more than other companies they had already started doing stuff to deserve it.
What I find galling is that nonsense like this is the reason GW shut down their own forums and facebook page. It seems like the same people who relentlessly stoke up and exagerate nonsense got them closed down, are the same people who complain about GW not communicating with your fanbase. It's like being in a phonecall with someone, giving them a relentless endless stream of abuse, and then complaining when the other person hangs up that they don't want to talk to you.
Stop twisting the facts, please.
The forums were closed at a time where there wasn't nearly the level of complaints that GW gets now and the Facebook page was shut down due to the popular and media outrage generated by the "Spot the Space Marine" fiasco, it had nothing to do with their customers.
Also if companies like EA or Riot or countless others, that have far more toxic communities manage to keep an online presence and forums open, why did the mild (by comparison) GW detractors "forced" them to do any of those things?
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Talizvar wrote: I find having risen to this bait a few times that the majority of the posts I see is:
"I see much negativity to GW/40k, it makes me unhappy. You should learn to suck it up princess. If not, you should rage-quit and give away all your toys (I would find it amusing). BTW I find your lack of perspective with man-toys very amusing in the most condescending of ways - get a life."
Can we list this officially as trolling?
The "negativity" posts seem to have the most negativity of disrespecting people's opinion and constructive criticism.
I have seen so many variations of my above paraphrase (that I find oddly offensive even having written it).
Er, yes. The people who defend GW are the real trolls, otherwise why would they object to the vilification of GW staff as "liars ", "corporate whores" and "8 year olds," the description of anyone who plays 40k as "bullies" or the (especially delicious) theorising that 40k promotes eugenics and nazi ideals. Anyone who gets depressed by this infantile stream of conspiracist claptrap must plainly be a company stooge.
What I find galling is that nonsense like this is the reason GW shut down their own forums and facebook page. It seems like the same people who relentlessly stoke up and exagerate nonsense got them closed down, are the same people who complain about GW not communicating with your fanbase. It's like being in a phonecall with someone, giving them a relentless endless stream of abuse, and then complaining when the other person hangs up that they don't want to talk to you.
Every other company manages to communicate with their customers. Also, their lack of communication is only making the problem worse. Also, GW has to learn to accept criticism and learn that they do make mistakes and that those mistakes should be fixed.
KommissarKarl wrote: What I find galling is that nonsense like this is the reason GW shut down their own forums and facebook page. It seems like the same people who relentlessly stoke up and exagerate nonsense got them closed down, are the same people who complain about GW not communicating with your fanbase. It's like being in a phonecall with someone, giving them a relentless endless stream of abuse, and then complaining when the other person hangs up that they don't want to talk to you.
Uhh... no. It's more like calling Customer Service because you have a problem, and them responding by telling you that you're just using the product wrong, then hanging up on you, then when you call back telling you that if you keep calling them to resolve your issue that they'll report you for harassment to the police, and then removing the "Contact Us" link from their website while posting a news story saying how the company boasts 100% satisfied customers.
GW got complaints, some of them legit and some the typical internet wishlisting (that incidentally everybody else gets too). GW responded by just shutting down their forums so they didn't have to hear any complaints, while simultaneously saying how great the game was. They tried to bully a small author writing a book for charity over minutiae, and closed their Facebook group when the media got wind and painted GW in a bad light (and rightly so). The community responded with even more vitriol because the company basically told them to feth off with their issues, and pretends that if you can't hear anyone complain, then there are no complaints.
No other business runs like that. Even EA, which is an awful company, has forums where people bitch about the game; some of it is nonsense but some of it isn't, and they still must take into account some of the better replies. GW alone closed their doors yet wonder why people hate them for it. Ignoring a problem does not make it go away.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Only if you don't realize that words have actual meaning and you can't just make up new ones to suit your needs...
A game that requires and investment of thousands of dollars can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that requires an investment of several hundred hours before you even start playing can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that takes 2+ hours to play can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that has multiple rulebooks that number several hundred pages that you need to read before you can play can never be called beer & pretzels.
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Only if you don't realize that words have actual meaning and you can't just make up new ones to suit your needs...
A game that requires and investment of thousands of dollars can never be called beer & pretzels. A game that requires an investment of several hundred hours before you even start playing can never be called beer & pretzels. A game that takes 2+ hours to play can never be called beer & pretzels. A game that has multiple rulebooks that number several hundred pages that you need to read before you can play can never be called beer & pretzels.
At least in the accepted definition of a beer and pretzels game. It could, technically, be a beer & pretzels game if you play it whilst consuming beer and pretzels, albeit not by the actual definition. In that case then most of my 40k games were chips ("crisps" to the UK) and soda games
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Only if you don't realize that words have actual meaning and you can't just make up new ones to suit your needs...
A game that requires and investment of thousands of dollars can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that requires an investment of several hundred hours before you even start playing can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that takes 2+ hours to play can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that has multiple rulebooks that number several hundred pages that you need to read before you can play can never be called beer & pretzels.
At least in the accepted definition of a beer and pretzels game. It could, technically, be a beer & pretzels game if you play it whilst consuming beer and pretzels, albeit not by the actual definition.
If you just don't give a feth about rules, winning, losing, and strategy, sure, GW could be a Beer and Pretzals game, but then, anything else would be as well.
My theory from what I saw around that time when things got shut down was they did not want to be holders of various people's opinions on their site.
They wanted a unconfused, official communication by the company so WD was to be the only means. It also had the side benefit of making people pay for that information.
I think they also did not want to pay for moderators to manage their site (remember those cost cuts are life!).
Really, GW management is easy to figure out on decision making as long as you think of how it will make them money (or save it).
Where would managing forums make GW money or be of any worth whatsoever? Feedback is not valued so it kinda stops right there.
Another stab at GW hate cure: Sell all my GW stuff, then I would no longer be "invested" and I would be free!!!!!!
insaniak wrote: We don't have enough information to know if the amount of work put into each codex release is purely up to the studio (and thus ultimately Jervis' responsibility) or if it is a result of budgetary constraints limiting development time and resources.
No, but we do know that he supports the idiotic idea that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game and only TFGs argue about the rules instead of 4+ing it or care so much about winning that they take overpowered units. And he should be fired for that.
His opinion is born out by my experience. Maybe it's you who's wrong and he's right?
Only if you don't realize that words have actual meaning and you can't just make up new ones to suit your needs...
A game that requires and investment of thousands of dollars can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that requires an investment of several hundred hours before you even start playing can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that takes 2+ hours to play can never be called beer & pretzels.
A game that has multiple rulebooks that number several hundred pages that you need to read before you can play can never be called beer & pretzels.
At least in the accepted definition of a beer and pretzels game. It could, technically, be a beer & pretzels game if you play it whilst consuming beer and pretzels, albeit not by the actual definition. In that case then most of my 40k games were chips ("crisps" to the UK) and soda games
Before I got out, I will admit GW was the biggest beer and pretzels game for me. In a typical game that took 4-5 hours to play, I would normally have been sitting for half that time doing nothing more than rolling a few saving throws. So, rather than sit there doing nothing for a half hour - I tended to drink beer and eat pretzels otherwise the 30-45 minute waits in between turns would be mind-numbingly boring.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Talizvar wrote: They wanted a unconfused, official communication by the company so WD was to be the only means. It also had the side benefit of making people pay for that information.
The exact word you're looking for here is "propaganda".
At least in the accepted definition of a beer and pretzels game. It could, technically, be a beer & pretzels game if you play it whilst consuming beer and pretzels, albeit not by the actual definition. In that case then most of my 40k games were chips ("crisps" to the UK) and soda games
Yeah, I guess I forgot that he might actually be talking about drinking beer and eating pretzels while he is playing...
Ok , but if it is true that GW thinks that the rules should be only guidlines and all the random stuff is suppose to be for the game, which I from personal expiriance disagree with. Why don't they make clear rules anyway. People who would want to change the rules , would change them just as GW wants , and they would change them no matter , if the rules are good or bad anyway. And those who want good rules , would get good rules and be happy too.
One can't say that one makes the best game in the world , price it like one , but make a bad product.
KommissarKarl wrote: What I find galling is that nonsense like this is the reason GW shut down their own forums and facebook page.
No, the reason that GW closed down their forums and their Facebook page is that they thought that it wasn't worth the effort of engaging with their customer base.
It seems like the same people who relentlessly stoke up and exagerate nonsense got them closed down, are the same people who complain about GW not communicating with your fanbase.
Indeed. It's almost as if choosing to not communicate directly with unhappy customers doesn't result in those customers magically becoming more happy about whatever it was that they were complaining about...
Nate668 wrote: The 40k community here on Dakka is decidedly toxic.
You should definitely try french boards.
The largest one doesn't even have 1/10 of the activity of Dakka. Dakka currently has 7600+ users online, that french board has an all-time record of 762 online users.
There are 90 admins/mods on that board. That's not a typo. Ninety mods. Just imagine what would be Dakka with one thousand angry mods.
How angry? Well... Basically, if two messages are off-topic, that thread is going to be nuked. If you're telling on the rumours thread that these meganobz are slightly on the expensive side, you're asked to shut up and stop whining because "we've already heard that at least a thousand times", then you get nuked.
If you're lucky, you (or the thread) won't be nuked, but your messages can be deleted/edited at will.
Of course, you're free to post thousands of messages about how the current releases are grrreeeaaat, and post your new project log about Ultramarines, since it's never been done before.
They're not cops, more like death squads armed with flamethrowers, that incinerate the entire block if something's wrong. Of course, they're constantly whining about the hard work and lack of collaboration of the populace.
The point is, Dakka just feels like... heaven. Really. It is a great community. It's alive, and it just seem to... well... work. People may agree or disagree with this or that, things can sometimes be heated, but that doesn't matter, because in the end, all opinions are valued and respected.
Hear hear! That's exactly why there's a [DCM] under my name. Dakka has something great going for it, I think the moderator policy (and the moderators themselves) is very good and allows for discussion you won't get on many forums. To me, toxicity is how bad people are to each other - LoL was given as an example, where everyone knows your mother intimately. Having a negative view of a product isn't toxicity - insulting people for talking negatively about a product is. Which is hilarious, because the OP is the closest thing to toxic here.
Yonan wrote: Hear hear! That's exactly why there's a [DCM] under my name. Dakka has something great going for it, I think the moderator policy (and the moderators themselves) is very good and allows for discussion you won't get on many forums. To me, toxicity is how bad people are to each other - LoL was given as an example, where everyone knows your mother intimately. Having a negative view of a product isn't toxicity - insulting people for talking negatively about a product is. Which is hilarious, because the OP is the closest thing to toxic here.
Isn't it more bad to specifically name him toxic when, in the original post, he did not name you toxic specifically? Do unto others is not the best policy all the time.
Yonan wrote: Hear hear! That's exactly why there's a [DCM] under my name. Dakka has something great going for it, I think the moderator policy (and the moderators themselves) is very good and allows for discussion you won't get on many forums. To me, toxicity is how bad people are to each other - LoL was given as an example, where everyone knows your mother intimately. Having a negative view of a product isn't toxicity - insulting people for talking negatively about a product is. Which is hilarious, because the OP is the closest thing to toxic here.
Isn't it more bad to specifically name him toxic when, in the original post, he did not name you toxic specifically? Do unto others is not the best policy all the time.
I said "the closest thing to" meaning he isn't, but is closer to it than what he was suggesting was toxic. No need to put words into my mouth, I can do that just fine myself. As far as I'm concerned, calling anything on dakka toxic is silly as anything that *is* toxic is removed by our sexy moderators. If you want to see *real* toxicity, check a F2P game like LoL.
Most of the threads I've seen shut down recently have been because of GW apologists making personal insults and telling people they shouldn't voice their opinion.
Indeed. It's almost as if choosing to not communicate directly with unhappy customers doesn't result in those customers magically becoming more happy about whatever it was that they were complaining about...
So many of the issues that cascade into "toxic hate fests" [sic] could be simple one line statements from the company. "Oh, that is a rules issue, we'll send it back up to the devs and get back to you in X days." And stick to X days and deliver.
Ta-da! No more hate on bad rules!
And then when you pull stupid stunts like stealth price raises, such as Dire Avengers, you should be ready to take it across the bow for doing something as asinine as that. Your market is a bunch of pretty intelligent folks as they like a game, in meat space, of Tactical Strategery™. So if you pull gak, expect gak. There are threads on the Wyrd forums talking about the disgruntled customers over shoddy release schedules. There are threads on the PP forums about the mold lines on the PVC kits. I'm sure there are probably threads on the Corvus Belli forums about the terrible rulebook layout. And each company has addressed these concerns with a response and timeline.
When's the last time Games Workshop has done that?
That's the cure for hate, from the company. It's 2014 in our hobby of wargmaing. It's time to stop the "Blame the Player" nonsense.
Actually I said either way you look at it. So pull the pipe out guys. Either you think we are stupid for liking it or we think your stupid for hating it. Either way there is no cure for stupid.
OgreChubbs wrote: Actually I said either way you look at it. So pull the pipe out guys. Either you think we are stupid for liking it or we think your stupid for hating it. Either way there is no cure for stupid.
And either way it contributes nothing but instead antagonizes people. If you're going to contribute, why not drop the insults and referring to everyone as stupid.
Well, we're talking about wargaming on a wargaming forum and 
