After reading many posts one poster in a different forum said something that got me thinking, should GW direct 40K towards children? With the fluff being so adult oriented, that Space Marines "the good guys" are actually worse than the what a lot of nations did in WW1 and WW2 and past histories combined. Killing and destroying planets because one person thought it was best or because he wanted to. Again the "good guys". Then taking what was sexual in the game out, but yet still keeping the "atrocities" that no child should ever be reading.

So either GW is going to have to make 40K more "lighter, opposite of darker and grim mark" for 8 year old kids to start the hobby. After all imagine all those parents if they knew that their 8 year old is actually putting together something worse than Nazis and playing with them. I am sure a lot of parents would be horrified if they actually knew what Space Marines the "good guys" actually did.

Since the sexualizition was taken out of the game (no matter how light it was and not much in it) and the new vibrant colours that GW seems to be adding in the artwork of 40K, 40K seems to becoming less grim mark and a dark place. So will the fluff be changing as well? Since I don't have the new Space Marine codex I am not sure if the fluff has changed. I have the latest Dark Angel codex and I don't see non of the atrocities the "good guys" do, it looks like the fluff is changing.

So should 40K become an adults only game so the game can become more darker, more grimmer? Maybe even more sexualized just like how Kingdom Death does it? I am not talking about the gigantic boobs they do, but the rest? Would the Chaos people love their Chaos minis look more like Kingdom Death and how other companies do it since they don't rely on 8 year olds buying their products?

I guess what I am asking is something like, do you want your WWE to be like WWF in the "attitude era" instead of "PG are" so do you want your 40K back to more Adult centric than PG centric?

*edit*

I know, just like how WWE is PG rated and that is where the money is, 40K is aimed at kids now because that is where the money is. So I know this will not happen, but what would you like?

From supposed sexualisation in GW to... Nazism?

Let us sort this out here. 40k ultimately has no "good guy" faction; although speckles of good ripple through many of the factions, the factions as a whole have very little moral high ground. All part of the Grimdark signature 40k has.

Is lore changing, and should it be more "kid friendly"? Apart from completely disagreeing that a fantasy universe can affect any child with a brain negatively, hell to the no. Where it stands is where it should always be, alongside the models, which don't have to be sexualised to prove a point.

Considering we just got GSC as a faction again, alongside all their background resurfacing in current publications, I'd also disagree that 40k is becoming less grimdark.

G.A

40k isn't becoming a kiddie game, or at least not in any real sense. Read a codex other than that one, and you'll still see plenty of darkness. (There's a reason some folks just don't care for Dark Angel fluff). For the most part, the darkness is still there. It's not quite as grimdark and hopeless as was the case in past editions, but it's definitely not fluffy-kitties-and-rainbow-ponies, by any stretch: just a bit more nuance added to avoid darkness-induced audience apathy.

What 40k doesn't need, is gratuitous blood and guts and random "hot and sexy" sprinkled in just to "earn that X rating". That's usually a recipe for comically over-the-top crappy writing. Gross or edgy for its own sake is rarely a decent design choice.

What GW is trying to do is maintain 40ks grim darkness, violence, and things like that buried juuuuust under the surface of what it show.

On the outside GW is trying to make 40k looks more fantasy and "Kid friendly" in the looses sense of the term.

An example of what they are doing:

Removed the old scandalous Demonetts, but they are still in lore, in the books just as slutty, just as scandalous, and just a many if not more boobs. But GW keeps that kinda stuff hidden away in the books which, odds are if a kid is getting into the hobby, we all know most kids dont read books for fun, so they wont even see or read that stuff, they will only need the surface.

That said, its also a game based in the UK which right now has some of the most ass backwards laws right now regarding what can and can not be shown. in the UK GOD FORBID! you show an uncovered tit, but a hulking demon ripping a space marine in half with his blood and guts falling to the floor? Totally fine, in fact sunday morning cartoon.

Unlike the US where we just dont give a gak and say sure what ever.

So TL;DR: On the surface the game is becoming more "Kid Friendly" But you need only to scratch the surface to get that sweet sweet grim dark release.

I'd argue the issue is less kid-oriented v. adult-oriented and more about the game getting (and I hesitate to use this phrase) 'dumbed down' in general. In earlier days the fluff was bigger/broader than the game, the writers weren't afraid to present lore as in-universe propaganda or documents from people without the whole picture, and they didn't try to gloss over the grimdarkness to try and designate protagonists. These days the fluff (at least that written in the Codexes, can't speak to Black Library) starts and stops at the game, the writers are going to too much effort to shoehorn game terms/game concepts into the lore. Codex fluff has been reduced to unit/weapon names and a pile of copy-paste buzzwords, and the writers are trying to step out of the universe and present the fluff as objective truth (no matter how contradictory it might be).

This isn't quite the same thing as an adults/children divide because marketing people have frequently forgotten what it's like to be a child and assume children are all idiots; you can hand children an intelligent/well-crafted product, you don't have to strip it down and flatten the characters to do it.

The questions of the morality of the setting (genocide, totalitarianism, theocracy, et cetera) are sort of a tangential problem; they seem to get thrown in as a brute-force tool for easy shock value. Fixing the fluff could involve toning down the grimdarkness, or it could involve trying to handle it more intelligently, but treating the audience like idiots is the actual problem and the bones of the content don't necessarily enforce going one way or the other with it.

Voted other. Keep it roughly the same. No major change is needed imo.

the real world equivalent of 40K is the crusade period only difference is 40K takes place in space and goes from planet to planet, people keep talking over sexualization in this game and those that do I call puritanically inclined, since very little of 40K if any has any sex appeal or sexually content, now blood and gore 40K has it in abundance and that is how it should be, also doubt the game is being geared towards kids because doubt many kids going to spend gobs of money on little plastic men.

I voted other as well. I don't want GW to go all "pc" just to increase sales to a younger audience, nor to they need to go full on x-rated gore fest.
They need to keep in mind that their target audience (young and old) is fairly desensitized to certain kinds of violence by the over saturation of video games in today's culture.
If they stay true to the Grim-dark feeling of the 80's/early 90's 40K, they should do fine.

We're really talking sexualization, since the game has no shortage of violence, affront to religion, or dark themes (betrayal, heresy, revenge, etc).

Sex is really the last taboo in Western society, and if anything is becoming moreso in regards to feminism, sexualization/exploitation of children, etc. I mean, people have a nervous breakdown talking about boob armor on Sisters of Battle. Is it any wonder that rumors are flying about Slaanesh being quietly retired? Does GW really want to walk the minefield of new releases of fluff involving Daemonettes, seduction, and orgies of pleasure?

There are too many people who can't deal with a game universe as fiction, and honestly I can see why GW would just rather not deal with it.

 WhiteBobcat wrote:
We're really talking sexualization, since the game has no shortage of violence, affront to religion, or dark themes (betrayal, heresy, revenge, etc).

Sex is really the last taboo in Western society, and if anything is becoming moreso in regards to feminism, sexualization/exploitation of children, etc. I mean, people have a nervous breakdown talking about boob armor on Sisters of Battle. Is it any wonder that rumors are flying about Slaanesh being quietly retired? Does GW really want to walk the minefield of new releases of fluff involving Daemonettes, seduction, and orgies of pleasure?

There are too many people who can't deal with a game universe as fiction, and honestly I can see why GW would just rather not deal with it.

I have a feeling from this post on, this is gonna quickly descend into nonsense.

Im off to the boob armor thread so.....

actually the only one I see having a major issue with it is the OP Davor not only did he have to start one thread but two threads about it that I know of. seriously Davor if you have this much issue with a pair of small bumps on the SoB's then this game is not for you, in fact most miniature games are not for you, don't go ruining it for others because you cannot extract that stick you have., i never for once considered 40K over sexualized ever, and i'm the kind who finds sexualization in Disney movies (tell me Elsa didn't have a come hither sway in her walk?) so for someone to find sexualization in GW they are either on a witch hunt or have some serious issues going on.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 WhiteBobcat wrote:
We're really talking sexualization, since the game has no shortage of violence, affront to religion, or dark themes (betrayal, heresy, revenge, etc).

Sex is really the last taboo in Western society, and if anything is becoming moreso in regards to feminism, sexualization/exploitation of children, etc. I mean, people have a nervous breakdown talking about boob armor on Sisters of Battle. Is it any wonder that rumors are flying about Slaanesh being quietly retired? Does GW really want to walk the minefield of new releases of fluff involving Daemonettes, seduction, and orgies of pleasure?

There are too many people who can't deal with a game universe as fiction, and honestly I can see why GW would just rather not deal with it.

I have a feeling from this post on, this is gonna quickly descend into nonsense.

I wonder where you might have gotten that impression from. (/sarcasm)

I'd prefer the 40k setting get a little more mature, but actually mature and not the 10 year old sense of what is considered "adult" that permeates most of the universe.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 WhiteBobcat wrote:
We're really talking sexualization, since the game has no shortage of violence, affront to religion, or dark themes (betrayal, heresy, revenge, etc).

Sex is really the last taboo in Western society, and if anything is becoming moreso in regards to feminism, sexualization/exploitation of children, etc. I mean, people have a nervous breakdown talking about boob armor on Sisters of Battle. Is it any wonder that rumors are flying about Slaanesh being quietly retired? Does GW really want to walk the minefield of new releases of fluff involving Daemonettes, seduction, and orgies of pleasure?

There are too many people who can't deal with a game universe as fiction, and honestly I can see why GW would just rather not deal with it.

I have a feeling from this post on, this is gonna quickly descend into nonsense.

I wonder where you might have gotten that impression from. (/sarcasm)

God only knows

Yeah, sorry to go there, but that's really what the discussion is about.

Describe in detail the flesh melting off of people's bones from a virus bomb and nobody blinks an eye. Talk about boobs and everybody loses their minds. It's no different with other media. Network TV regularly shows gruesome torture and murder on primetime TV, but a gay kiss is a national scandal.

The other problem is that when you get into planetary levels of ultra-violence, the narrative starts to become a caricature of itself. "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic". If you try to make things too GrimDark, nobody can get invested in the characters or narrative.

IMO, Horus Heresy strikes a good balance, and is why it has been successful even though everybody knows the eventual outcome.

I think the Grim Darkness (TM) is about right.

If people want a sexy game they can play a different game. This is a wargame. Shoehorning sex and other stuff into 40k is pointless, its like all the threads that pop up about racism, bigotry and sexism in 40k, its a game about war. I just want to blow people up with big guns manned by people who worship a god that creates plagues that wipe out planets.


It's unreal how upset people get about daemonettes not having 2 boobs.

If you want a sexy board game, play kingdom death, or customize your minis (like all the bikini marine players). Plenty of people who want an exceptionally gory 40k already have very violent custom minis.


If you want tittyranids, by all means, bust out the green stuff. That is what the hobby is all about, but don't go complaining that GW isn't doing it for you.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
If people want a sexy game they can play a different game. This is a wargame. Shoehorning sex and other stuff into 40k is pointless, its like all the threads that pop up about racism, bigotry and sexism in 40k, its a game about war. I just want to blow people up with big guns manned by people who worship a god that creates plagues that wipe out planets.


It's unreal how upset people get about daemonettes not having 2 boobs.

If you want a sexy board game, play kingdom death, or customize your minis (like all the bikini marine players). Plenty of people who want an exceptionally gory 40k already have very violent custom minis.


If you want tittyranids, by all means, bust out the green stuff. That is what the hobby is all about, but don't go complaining that GW isn't doing it for you.

I think the OP's complaint is that is what GW is doing putting boob plate on the SoB's.

I'm surprised how many people want 40k to go darker, grittier, and more okay with sexuality. I am 100% fine with those things, but I can't be selfish. 40k as a hobby needs to grow, and that means it needs to attract a younger audience in a target range. What range is that? I think it's 14-18. Young blood is necessary to make sure that the hobby carries forward, and GW's survival depends on that.

GW has a lot of leeway on its models and artistic depictions, but it has to avoid anything that would put it in the 18+ category. While slipping a boob may seem strange to us as being worse than telling a story about virus-bombing populations, the laws of many countries make it quite clear that, yes, that is the case from their perspective. So, guess what? It means GW needs to walk a fine line there.

It should not become grittier or more sexualized if that pushes the barrier of entry above 18 years old. Yes, the older crowds have more money to spend, but you need to bring people in young so they have the desire to grow their collection when they're older.

 Yarium wrote:
I'm surprised how many people want 40k to go darker, grittier, and more okay with sexuality. I am 100% fine with those things, but I can't be selfish. 40k as a hobby needs to grow, and that means it needs to attract a younger audience in a target range. What range is that? I think it's 14-18. Young blood is necessary to make sure that the hobby carries forward, and GW's survival depends on that.

GW has a lot of leeway on its models and artistic depictions, but it has to avoid anything that would put it in the 18+ category. While slipping a boob may seem strange to us as being worse than telling a story about virus-bombing populations, the laws of many countries make it quite clear that, yes, that is the case from their perspective. So, guess what? It means GW needs to walk a fine line there.

It should not become grittier or more sexualized if that pushes the barrier of entry above 18 years old. Yes, the older crowds have more money to spend, but you need to bring people in young so they have the desire to grow their collection when they're older.

problem is for GW to make the game more bought by 14-18 year olds they have to reduce the cost, anything other then that will not get kids to buy the game, when they can spend maybe $20 max and be playing a card game right away (magic, Yu-Gi-Oh) or even a little more $40 for (STAW, SWAW) that is where the kids will spend the money since it takes about $100 minimum to get playing warhammer in any connotation.

the game is not being geared towards young teen kids but towards college aged kids and such, so a boob here and there wouldn't be an issue and think GW has less then half a dozen model designs that might show boob or such.

40K, as a setting, is already deeply adult, it is just that it somewhat scales with the maturity of the observer.

A teenager will see the Spess Mahrines running around blowing the gak out of all and sundry, with perhaps the odd titter about boobies or a knob joke here or there when Slaanesh rears up in the conversation.

An adult will, if they take the time to consider it, see the more dystopian element to the setting, that mankind are hanging on by their fingertips, that a life of centuries spent almost entirely in combat isn't enough for the Marines to ultimately make any real difference, and that to follow Slaanesh is akin to being perpetually thirsty, no matter how much you drink, and is, in fact, probably a pretty desperate existence.

The setting is perfectly adult enough, if you approach it like an adult.

*checks imperial pocket watch if perfectly timed events* yep, it's right on time.


I'll say this, on the heels of what ever sanity, order, and dignity this thread will have in the next few moments.

My personal belief, so take that at what you want, is nothing in the game, be it sexual, violent, or what ever, should ever be changed for the sake of change, political correctness or appeal. It should be up in o the writers, sculptors, and models as to what things should be or should not be, or look like in a game. If the creators want there to be boob monsters, in the game and have models for it, then I agree, if they want to shy away from that because that's what the story calls for then I support it.

Changing a setting, theme, or tone simply to appeal to a group, while going against what the creators of said IP want, that's when it's wrong. Shoe hornning anything into a universe soly for reasons, again be it PC, profit, or to appeal is wrong and immoral if it goes against what the artests want.

If that offends, or angers people, well then that story, game, or universe is not for you and the creators should never change becuase of it.

Creative freedom is what allowed GW to become what it is, because they said screw you guys space DND sounds bomb as gak! Don't like it don't care *does line of dark eldar drugs, grabs chain sword, hops on the back of a massive squig, take an eldar far seer scantily clad in plate kini while shouting,* IMPERIAL MANIFEST DESTINY MOTHER GAKERS!!! DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA!

It's about as dark now as I'd like.

I'm not sure how the hobby could be more adult-oriented, honestly, apart from adding blackjack and hookers. The amount of money required, for starters, is a pretty high bar of entry for children.

Apart from that, the amount of time it takes to assemble and paint miniatures is pretty prohibitive for most children, seems like to me.

On top of that, understating the rules takes quite a bit of reading comprehension and experience, but be honest.

I mean, it takes a bunch of money, time, reading, and patience, and children don't generally have a much of any of those things.

And about zero of the lore or setting is very kid-friendly, as the OP pointed out.

But I guess I got into the hobby as an adult, so that just may be my experience.

At any rate, I'm happy with the 'adultness' of the hobby in general.

I'd like them to roll it back a little bit. For the most part, the fluff is still very grim, though there's some changes that I think need to be made. (Like, less emphasis on special characters/heroes, reintroduce some of the oldcron fluff). For me, the biggest thing as far as "less grim" comes from the art, which doesn't feel as gritty/grim. That falls more towards the marketing to younger audiences bit though.

Yes. Lore-wise it doesn't need to get darker than the existing dark things, but "grimdark" needs to mean more than "heroic space marines doing heroic things, but MOAR SKULLS EVERYWHERE". But where the game needs to be more adult-oriented is in the rules. GW is catering to kids way too much with the current rules and it's dragging down the game for the rest of us.

Asterios wrote:
problem is for GW to make the game more bought by 14-18 year olds they have to reduce the cost, anything other then that will not get kids to buy the game, when they can spend maybe $20 max and be playing a card game right away (magic, Yu-Gi-Oh) or even a little more $40 for (STAW, SWAW) that is where the kids will spend the money since it takes about $100 minimum to get playing warhammer in any connotation.

the game is not being geared towards young teen kids but towards college aged kids and such, so a boob here and there wouldn't be an issue and think GW has less then half a dozen model designs that might show boob or such.

As someone who has gone through the whole GW lifecycle, and has seen many, many other players do the same, I think the monetary reality is a little different. Younger kids tend to have more time than money, so they are able to really get hooked on the hobby. When they enjoy it, they will play it for a long time, and that has value. They become ambassadors of the brand, and their lifetime investment will be massive. Older players that pick it up tend to have more money than time. They will drop a large amount of money quickly, but then they're also much more likely to drop the hobby in a quicker timeframe as well. So, while you get a sales boost, you miss out on the lifetime returns of the customer.

So, while yeah, the younger crowd might only by a $60 box once every few months (with increasing quantities over time as their purchasing power increases), over the course of a decade, that's a lot more than the adult who drops $1500, buys an army, then drops the hobby.

Comparing to Magic and all the other games, people have an amount of money they'll spend each month on entertainment, and they'll buy in whatever increments that amount allows. If it's $20 per month, then a Magic player will play a draft every month, while a 40k player will save up for a few months to buy the $60 box, and the STAW player will buy a ship during that month. In the end, they all spend the same amount, just over different time frames.

Bring back Slaanesh!
Bring back the Diaz Deamonettes!

What MoO said.
Also, yes, the system needs more maturity. The current 40k ruleset is approaching the realm of being so random that skill is slowly becoming irrelevant. Too much emphasis is placed on rolling dice to determine the modifier to rolling dice to determine how many dice you roll.

 Yarium wrote:

Asterios wrote:
problem is for GW to make the game more bought by 14-18 year olds they have to reduce the cost, anything other then that will not get kids to buy the game, when they can spend maybe $20 max and be playing a card game right away (magic, Yu-Gi-Oh) or even a little more $40 for (STAW, SWAW) that is where the kids will spend the money since it takes about $100 minimum to get playing warhammer in any connotation.

the game is not being geared towards young teen kids but towards college aged kids and such, so a boob here and there wouldn't be an issue and think GW has less then half a dozen model designs that might show boob or such.

As someone who has gone through the whole GW lifecycle, and has seen many, many other players do the same, I think the monetary reality is a little different. Younger kids tend to have more time than money, so they are able to really get hooked on the hobby. When they enjoy it, they will play it for a long time, and that has value. They become ambassadors of the brand, and their lifetime investment will be massive. Older players that pick it up tend to have more money than time. They will drop a large amount of money quickly, but then they're also much more likely to drop the hobby in a quicker timeframe as well. So, while you get a sales boost, you miss out on the lifetime returns of the customer.

So, while yeah, the younger crowd might only by a $60 box once every few months (with increasing quantities over time as their purchasing power increases), over the course of a decade, that's a lot more than the adult who drops $1500, buys an army, then drops the hobby.

Comparing to Magic and all the other games, people have an amount of money they'll spend each month on entertainment, and they'll buy in whatever increments that amount allows. If it's $20 per month, then a Magic player will play a draft every month, while a 40k player will save up for a few months to buy the $60 box, and the STAW player will buy a ship during that month. In the end, they all spend the same amount, just over different time frames.

problem is kids don't think like that, kids these days are all about quick and fast and easy, which is why Magic and Yu-Gi-Oh and STAW and such are big hits with kids, it doesn't take a lot, 9 out of 10 kids will go for those games while maybe 1 will go for a game like GW, games like GW are strongly in the college crowd domain and adult domain. been to several big GW games at some local game stores and at most might see 1 or 2 kids playing(highschool or less), go to a Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh game the kids outnumber the adults playing.

My first GW box as dino's vs knights + robin hoods boyz. The models where clean / free of gore and the art was comical or heroic. This was a long time ago but I don't think GW is that kid friendly now.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Bring back Slaanesh!
Bring back the Diaz Deamonettes!

Yes, please!

 Yarium wrote:
As someone who has gone through the whole GW lifecycle, and has seen many, many other players do the same, I think the monetary reality is a little different. Younger kids tend to have more time than money, so they are able to really get hooked on the hobby. When they enjoy it, they will play it for a long time, and that has value. They become ambassadors of the brand, and their lifetime investment will be massive. Older players that pick it up tend to have more money than time. They will drop a large amount of money quickly, but then they're also much more likely to drop the hobby in a quicker timeframe as well. So, while you get a sales boost, you miss out on the lifetime returns of the customer.

I have to disagree here. Younger customers may have a large lifetime investment if they stay in the hobby, but they also drop the hobby (like any other hobby) at a high rate. There's a reason GW's strategy so heavily involves the "three purchase" model of getting an initial purchase, a birthday gift, and a christmas gift, and then anything after that is a bonus. Kids are impulsive, the thing they're begging their parents to buy one week is often collecting dust in the closet the next week.

Asterios wrote:

 Yarium wrote:

Asterios wrote:
problem is for GW to make the game more bought by 14-18 year olds they have to reduce the cost, anything other then that will not get kids to buy the game, when they can spend maybe $20 max and be playing a card game right away (magic, Yu-Gi-Oh) or even a little more $40 for (STAW, SWAW) that is where the kids will spend the money since it takes about $100 minimum to get playing warhammer in any connotation.

the game is not being geared towards young teen kids but towards college aged kids and such, so a boob here and there wouldn't be an issue and think GW has less then half a dozen model designs that might show boob or such.

As someone who has gone through the whole GW lifecycle, and has seen many, many other players do the same, I think the monetary reality is a little different. Younger kids tend to have more time than money, so they are able to really get hooked on the hobby. When they enjoy it, they will play it for a long time, and that has value. They become ambassadors of the brand, and their lifetime investment will be massive. Older players that pick it up tend to have more money than time. They will drop a large amount of money quickly, but then they're also much more likely to drop the hobby in a quicker timeframe as well. So, while you get a sales boost, you miss out on the lifetime returns of the customer.

So, while yeah, the younger crowd might only by a $60 box once every few months (with increasing quantities over time as their purchasing power increases), over the course of a decade, that's a lot more than the adult who drops $1500, buys an army, then drops the hobby.

Comparing to Magic and all the other games, people have an amount of money they'll spend each month on entertainment, and they'll buy in whatever increments that amount allows. If it's $20 per month, then a Magic player will play a draft every month, while a 40k player will save up for a few months to buy the $60 box, and the STAW player will buy a ship during that month. In the end, they all spend the same amount, just over different time frames.

problem is kids don't think like that, kids these days are all about quick and fast and easy, which is why Magic and Yu-Gi-Oh and STAW and such are big hits with kids, it doesn't take a lot, 9 out of 10 kids will go for those games while maybe 1 will go for a game like GW, games like GW are strongly in the college crowd domain and adult domain. been to several big GW games at some local game stores and at most might see 1 or 2 kids playing(highschool or less), go to a Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh game the kids outnumber the adults playing.

That's how I see it too. Imo, most who started 40k had an interest in their teen, but they really started the hobby once they hit adulthood. One of the reason is the high cost, the other, the patience and skills it requires which most kids don't have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To answer the OP, yes I do feel GW should be more adult oriented. AFAIK, young kids aren't big GW purchasers, and teens and adults, in average, would rather have a mature setting. The newest codex seems like they have been sanitize a bit and I don't like it one bit. The Horus Heresy novels is a perfect example of what they should aim for imo (the first 3 I should say, cause they are the only one I read). Not the new DA codex or the Red Waagh which felt like kids book imo.

We play with toys. Having a NC-17 background won't make it more dignified. But if telling people you play with adult toys makes you feel better, more power to you.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Bring back Slaanesh!
Bring back the Diaz Deamonettes!

Yes, please!

I support this

Davor wrote:
I have the latest Dark Angel codex and I don't see non of the atrocities the "good guys" do, it looks like the fluff is changing.

Dude read it again. Especially the section on the Interrogator Chaplain. They torture people into confession much like the medieval Inquisition.

I think that having no real 'good guys' is a major bonus of the background, and especially important to teach to kids. It was one of the major things that attracted me to the setting when I was a kid. The tone of 40k should make it clear that the Imperium of Man is really, really bad. It's much more morally complex then most other 'kids' settings and I think that's a good thing. It's much more educational to teach kids to think about different shades of grey than to think in terms of 'good guys' and 'bad guys'.

I'm also not opposed to having sexual themes in a realistic setting - it's just that, in a war-game, they're probably not going to come up that much.

I think a lot of the criticism GW come up against in that regard is because of sexism in sculpting style rather than just 'including sex in the setting', and this often gets confused in all the 'boob armour' threads for prudishness. I don't think there's really a problem with having, say, a Chaos God of Excess and some of that excess being sexual. I think there is more damage done when you give that god all the female-looking models (because female bodies = sex, right?).

As someone who has gone through the whole GW lifecycle, and has seen many, many other players do the same, I think the monetary reality is a little different. Younger kids tend to have more time than money, so they are able to really get hooked on the hobby. When they enjoy it, they will play it for a long time, and that has value. They become ambassadors of the brand, and their lifetime investment will be massive. Older players that pick it up tend to have more money than time. They will drop a large amount of money quickly, but then they're also much more likely to drop the hobby in a quicker timeframe as well. So, while you get a sales boost, you miss out on the lifetime returns of the customer.

So, while yeah, the younger crowd might only by a $60 box once every few months (with increasing quantities over time as their purchasing power increases), over the course of a decade, that's a lot more than the adult who drops $1500, buys an army, then drops the hobby.

Comparing to Magic and all the other games, people have an amount of money they'll spend each month on entertainment, and they'll buy in whatever increments that amount allows. If it's $20 per month, then a Magic player will play a draft every month, while a 40k player will save up for a few months to buy the $60 box, and the STAW player will buy a ship during that month. In the end, they all spend the same amount, just over different time frames.

You forgot one important category of buyer. Those like myself who have been playing/collecting for 20+ years and who will drop in a year more than any kid/teenager could (and year in, year out).
Theres something to be said for GW targetting the disposable income consumer and those of us that may not have huge amounts of time due to work/commitments/family etc but nevertheless still play and collect regularly.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
That said, its also a game based in the UK which right now has some of the most ass backwards laws right now regarding what can and can not be shown. in the UK GOD FORBID! you show an uncovered tit, but a hulking demon ripping a space marine in half with his blood and guts falling to the floor? Totally fine, in fact sunday morning cartoon.

Unlike the US where we just dont give a gak and say sure what ever.

Not sure what UK you've been too but this doesn't sound at all like the UK I live in

This also doesn't sound like the US I live in (where folks tend to go off like a nickel rocket over even the merest hint of a nipple)!

jade_angel wrote:
This also doesn't sound like the US I live in (where folks tend to go off like a nickel rocket over even the merest hint of a nipple)!

Depends on the part of the US. I support nipples.

#FreeTheNipple

I think your avatar already has.....

From what I've seen at my LGS, it's mostly the younger people buying stuff and the older ones playing. Fluff wise, SM are brutal! They're xenophobes who disagree with anyone who doubts the Emperor (branding them heretics), plus they mostly start all the wars they fight. Although, I did think Warhammer was aimed at the 12 plus category anyway (ok, not adults, but not for younger people anyway).

Ratius wrote:You forgot one important category of buyer. Those like myself who have been playing/collecting for 20+ years and who will drop in a year more than any kid/teenager could (and year in, year out).
Theres something to be said for GW targetting the disposable income consumer and those of us that may not have huge amounts of time due to work/commitments/family etc but nevertheless still play and collect regularly.

Mr. CyberPunk wrote:That's how I see it too. Imo, most who started 40k had an interest in their teen, but they really started the hobby once they hit adulthood. One of the reason is the high cost, the other, the patience and skills it requires which most kids don't have.

Those actually fit exactly with what I was saying. Such a client starts young, with little purchasing power, but because they develop an affinity for the brand at a younger age, as they grow older and their purchasing power increases, they become the exact kind of customer that I would want if I were running GW. They're someone that's loyal enough to the brand that they consistently make larger purchases. Pushing for these kinds of customers automatically attracts other customers along the way that don't stick with the brand, but these kinds of customers are your glue.

Peregrine wrote:I have to disagree here. Younger customers may have a large lifetime investment if they stay in the hobby, but they also drop the hobby (like any other hobby) at a high rate. There's a reason GW's strategy so heavily involves the "three purchase" model of getting an initial purchase, a birthday gift, and a christmas gift, and then anything after that is a bonus. Kids are impulsive, the thing they're begging their parents to buy one week is often collecting dust in the closet the next week.

Very fair point. My thinking is that younger customers that stay in the hobby become ambassadors for the brand. Their passion rubs off on people, and that's part of how you get the older customers too. However, that's me saying something with absolutely 0 proof to back it up beyond my own gut feeling.

 Yarium wrote:

Ratius wrote:You forgot one important category of buyer. Those like myself who have been playing/collecting for 20+ years and who will drop in a year more than any kid/teenager could (and year in, year out).
Theres something to be said for GW targetting the disposable income consumer and those of us that may not have huge amounts of time due to work/commitments/family etc but nevertheless still play and collect regularly.

Mr. CyberPunk wrote:That's how I see it too. Imo, most who started 40k had an interest in their teen, but they really started the hobby once they hit adulthood. One of the reason is the high cost, the other, the patience and skills it requires which most kids don't have.

Those actually fit exactly with what I was saying. Such a client starts young, with little purchasing power, but because they develop an affinity for the brand at a younger age, as they grow older and their purchasing power increases, they become the exact kind of customer that I would want if I were running GW. They're someone that's loyal enough to the brand that they consistently make larger purchases. Pushing for these kinds of customers automatically attracts other customers along the way that don't stick with the brand, but these kinds of customers are your glue.

Peregrine wrote:I have to disagree here. Younger customers may have a large lifetime investment if they stay in the hobby, but they also drop the hobby (like any other hobby) at a high rate. There's a reason GW's strategy so heavily involves the "three purchase" model of getting an initial purchase, a birthday gift, and a christmas gift, and then anything after that is a bonus. Kids are impulsive, the thing they're begging their parents to buy one week is often collecting dust in the closet the next week.

Very fair point. My thinking is that younger customers that stay in the hobby become ambassadors for the brand. Their passion rubs off on people, and that's part of how you get the older customers too. However, that's me saying something with absolutely 0 proof to back it up beyond my own gut feeling.

problem is when you have a choice between a dozen miniatures or so or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick ?

Asterios wrote:
problem is when you have a choice between a dozen miniatures or so or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick ?

That's called market share. Some percentage of kids will buy 40k, some with buy the new game. I can't answer this question on the whole, because that's the biggest question facing just about every entertainment company on the planet. Movie companies ask themselves nearly that exact same question, except they ask "choice between watching Doctor Strange or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick?". However, that's why I voted for GW not to become more adult orientated, because it would lose them market share amongst young kids in a time where I believe market share over that age group matters more than ever. Still, I can't say for sure I'm right, because that would require a ton of market research that I just can't acquire. Instead, it's just my hunch, and no one is wrong for disagreeing with it.

jade_angel wrote:
40k isn't becoming a kiddie game, or at least not in any real sense. Read a codex other than that one, and you'll still see plenty of darkness. (There's a reason some folks just don't care for Dark Angel fluff). For the most part, the darkness is still there. It's not quite as grimdark and hopeless as was the case in past editions, but it's definitely not fluffy-kitties-and-rainbow-ponies, by any stretch: just a bit more nuance added to avoid darkness-induced audience apathy.

What 40k doesn't need, is gratuitous blood and guts and random "hot and sexy" sprinkled in just to "earn that X rating". That's usually a recipe for comically over-the-top crappy writing. Gross or edgy for its own sake is rarely a decent design choice.

Pretty much this.

At OP, I don't like the new D&D/WoW-style art, with everyone having biceps the size of Bournemouth. However, the sexual themes touched upon in 40k were never done so in a very adult manner. Tbh, a total aesthetic revamp of Slaanesh and the Sisters would go a loooooooong way (we might get both). Focus on excess and fanaticism, not whatever else seems to be going on.

 Yarium wrote:

Asterios wrote:
problem is when you have a choice between a dozen miniatures or so or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick ?

That's called market share. Some percentage of kids will buy 40k, some with buy the new game. I can't answer this question on the whole, because that's the biggest question facing just about every entertainment company on the planet. Movie companies ask themselves nearly that exact same question, except they ask "choice between watching Doctor Strange or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick?". However, that's why I voted for GW not to become more adult orientated, because it would lose them market share amongst young kids in a time where I believe market share over that age group matters more than ever. Still, I can't say for sure I'm right, because that would require a ton of market research that I just can't acquire. Instead, it's just my hunch, and no one is wrong for disagreeing with it.

ok Market share how many kids under the age of 18 play 40K at your local game store? out of the several stores around me I can say 2. now how many play Magic? or Yu-Gi-Oh or do you think stay home and play video games? or are currently out hunting Pokemon.

40K does not endear itself to the younger crowd cause its expensive toys.

Asterios wrote:actually the only one I see having a major issue with it is the OP Davor not only did he have to start one thread but two threads about it that I know of. seriously Davor if you have this much issue with a pair of small bumps on the SoB's then this game is not for you, in fact most miniature games are not for you, don't go ruining it for others because you cannot extract that stick you have., i never for once considered 40K over sexualized ever, and i'm the kind who finds sexualization in Disney movies (tell me Elsa didn't have a come hither sway in her walk?) so for someone to find sexualization in GW they are either on a witch hunt or have some serious issues going on.

No I don't have an issue at all. If you even bothered to read what I said in the other post I don't have an issue with it at all. Also this topic has nothing to due with sex so not sure why you are trying to pick me out now.

Also how am I ruining it for others? Don't like the topic don't read it. Take your advice and use it instead of trying to belittle other people who have a differing opinion than you. Also as I said, before you comment make sure you know what my opinion is, because I already said it and you choose to ignore it.

 Yarium wrote:

Ratius wrote:You forgot one important category of buyer. Those like myself who have been playing/collecting for 20+ years and who will drop in a year more than any kid/teenager could (and year in, year out).
Theres something to be said for GW targetting the disposable income consumer and those of us that may not have huge amounts of time due to work/commitments/family etc but nevertheless still play and collect regularly.

Mr. CyberPunk wrote:That's how I see it too. Imo, most who started 40k had an interest in their teen, but they really started the hobby once they hit adulthood. One of the reason is the high cost, the other, the patience and skills it requires which most kids don't have.

Those actually fit exactly with what I was saying. Such a client starts young, with little purchasing power, but because they develop an affinity for the brand at a younger age, as they grow older and their purchasing power increases, they become the exact kind of customer that I would want if I were running GW. They're someone that's loyal enough to the brand that they consistently make larger purchases. Pushing for these kinds of customers automatically attracts other customers along the way that don't stick with the brand, but these kinds of customers are your glue.
[

Ok, but where I ''disagree'' (not really sure you disagree though) is that I think having an adult oriented setting won't harm these kids interest (they'll probably ignore the blunt of it and focus on the minis or the more easily accessible part of the setting). But as they grow older, it will keep them hooked up and allow some will to fully pick the hobby once they have the fund for it.

Basically, my point of view is that having a kids setting may help bring in more young fans (and maybe plain more fans overall), but these kids won't spend enough $$$ to compensate the older fans who dropped out because of said kiddie setting, and they mostly won't stay in the hobby very long either as they'll find it too childish growing up.

Something like how fantasy was would be nice: Still grim and dark, but not comically and cripplingly so. show that the "good guys" win and loose, not just Pyrrhic victories and losses. The Empire (fantasy) ahd it rough, but was still able to make progress. That being said, I don't want it to go noblebright, but there needs to be a decent middle ground IMO. Back in "the day" there was plenty of silly and a decent amount of "oh look, an actual victory" and no one seemed to mind.

Grim Dark was more about how there is much that cannot be understood, and the feeling of creeping inevitability. 40k presented that well for a long time, but they didn't focus exclusively on the grim dark aspects in the earlier editions. But as time has passed it's become less actual Grim Dark and more comical and ridiculous. I think the shining example of how bad it has gotten was the Grey Knights codex that introduced them as a stand alone faction, which took the 'dark' aspect of the setting into absurdity.

A dark setting still has points of hope, humor, and genuine human moments. Places where you can build connection with characters and care about what happens to them. At this point 40k has become a comic caricature, pretending to be dark so hard that it's simply become rediculous instead. I think a step back and a reevaluation of how the fluff is presented is needed. There's too much light shown on the terrible aspects of the universe, and too little given to making you care about the people who fight against it. If you want a more adult theme, then more engaging storytelling will help develop that. As it is, the theme is actually extremely childish - a comic caricature that appeals to kids on the 'LOOK HOW COOL THIS ALL IS!' scale.

 Azreal13 wrote:
40K, as a setting, is already deeply adult, it is just that it somewhat scales with the maturity of the observer.

A teenager will see the Spess Mahrines running around blowing the gak out of all and sundry, with perhaps the odd titter about boobies or a knob joke here or there when Slaanesh rears up in the conversation.

An adult will, if they take the time to consider it, see the more dystopian element to the setting, that mankind are hanging on by their fingertips, that a life of centuries spent almost entirely in combat isn't enough for the Marines to ultimately make any real difference, and that to follow Slaanesh is akin to being perpetually thirsty, no matter how much you drink, and is, in fact, probably a pretty desperate existence.

The setting is perfectly adult enough, if you approach it like an adult.

I think this is very well put

I love the 40k setting. I got into it during the tail end of 2nd edition when I was 10 years old and at the time the dark undertones really appealed to me, and I grew to love them more and more as time went on. I still see lots of parents and children of that age come in and out of my local GW so I still think it appeals to younger children just as it once did to me.

So far this thread hasn't talked about AoS. That's where I would like the setting to get darker - or maybe just more realistic. What I liked about WHFB was it had all the high fantasy and all the low fantasy and players could pick or choose which themes appealed to them (and for me that's the low fantasy side). Now with AoS we only have the high fantasy elements. We have cities on floating islands but no explanation of how traders get up or down from them. Stormcast who march in full plate armour, never eat or sleep or rest, never make camps or set up supply lines. I find myself clinging to any shred of detail about how the world works on a day-to-day basis (like the city of Hammerhal on either side of a realmgate where humans funnel lava from one side to help Aelfs on the other control the forests in return for food and other trade), because overall the AoS setting still lacks a lot of that detail.

And from what I take from Azreal13's comment above is that to make stuff appeal to adult audiences it's all about the details, and it's in the details that nuances, themes and undertones can thrive.


EDIT: didn't see this was in 40K discussion haha

Unpopular opinion, but I prefer the new androgenous models for daemonettes, they are more in line with the fluff and makes sense.

Asterios wrote:
problem is kids don't think like that, kids these days are all about quick and fast and easy, which is why Magic and Yu-Gi-Oh and STAW and such are big hits with kids, it doesn't take a lot, 9 out of 10 kids will go for those games while maybe 1 will go for a game like GW, games like GW are strongly in the college crowd domain and adult domain. been to several big GW games at some local game stores and at most might see 1 or 2 kids playing(highschool or less), go to a Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh game the kids outnumber the adults playing.

Asterios wrote:
problem is when you have a choice between a dozen miniatures or so or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick ?

Personally I view it a bit different. This is a pretty niche hobby. Always was. Always will be. And for the same reason that the theatre still survives in an era of dvds, cinema, tv, video games etc, table rob wargames and 'old school' crafts and hobbies will always have an appeal to some. In a global context, it is enough.

Regarding the adult/kiddie divide for 40k, I disagree with both terms. 40k is neither. It is somewhat different. It is a juvenile pulp IP. When you're young, it seems dark and grown up, because it appeals to the less mature, less 'grown up' side of you. But it's just noise and flashing lights, really. It's not really grown up, it's what grown up seems like to young uns. Or what they interpret and wish grown up to be. But it's certainly not kiddie at the same time. When you're all grown up, the very same lore you loved in 40k is tacky, one dimensional, and juvenile.

I think rather than the adult/kiddie divide, I think we need to realise we ourselves are older. And get older. It's our perspectives that change, not necessarily the lore's presentation. The stuff you loved a story a twelve year old is the same stuff current twelve year olds are engrossed by. If they read the lore you loved when you were twelve, they would love it too. And see is all as part of the same whole. But also. Back when you were twelve, adults would have scoffed at the stuff you found enthralling, just as you do the same to the current generation of twelve year olds engrossed by the lore.

People get older, people's perception of life changes. Thst is all.

As for the grimdark nature of 40k, I see no wrong with kids being exposed to it. These are themes that are present in most fantasy and sci fi settings. Just look at star wars and mass genocide.

Funnily enough even as a kid I thought the depiction of daemonettes, slaanesh and some sisters of battle models were very childish. Like the answer was to slap tits on everything. Nothing wrong with the concept of slaanesh or sisters repentant but do they have to look like they were designed by an adolescent basement dweller?

Reavas wrote:
Unpopular opinion, but I prefer the new androgenous models for daemonettes, they are more in line with the fluff and makes sense.

I would not mind them so much if it where not for:
A) the terrible, static, poses. The Diaz models had life, they where twirling, swirling, leaping and bounding. They where dancing. The new ones are great clodhopping clubfooted and clumsy aberrations.
B) The awful piranha faces. They do not look good, they look bloody awful.

Deadnight wrote:

Asterios wrote:
problem is kids don't think like that, kids these days are all about quick and fast and easy, which is why Magic and Yu-Gi-Oh and STAW and such are big hits with kids, it doesn't take a lot, 9 out of 10 kids will go for those games while maybe 1 will go for a game like GW, games like GW are strongly in the college crowd domain and adult domain. been to several big GW games at some local game stores and at most might see 1 or 2 kids playing(highschool or less), go to a Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh game the kids outnumber the adults playing.

Asterios wrote:
problem is when you have a choice between a dozen miniatures or so or the newest video game, which do you think kids will pick ?

Personally I view it a bit different. This is a pretty niche hobby. Always was. Always will be. And for the same reason that the theatre still survives in an era of dvds, cinema, tv, video games etc, table rob wargames and 'old school' crafts and hobbies will always have an appeal to some. In a global context, it is enough.

Regarding the adult/kiddie divide for 40k, I disagree with both terms. 40k is neither. It is somewhat different. It is a juvenile pulp IP. When you're young, it seems dark and grown up, because it appeals to the less mature, less 'grown up' side of you. But it's just noise and flashing lights, really. It's not really grown up, it's what grown up seems like to young uns. Or what they interpret and wish grown up to be. But it's certainly not kiddie at the same time. When you're all grown up, the very same lore you loved in 40k is tacky, one dimensional, and juvenile.

I think rather than the adult/kiddie divide, I think we need to realise we ourselves are older. And get older. It's our perspectives that change, not necessarily the lore's presentation. The stuff you loved a story a twelve year old is the same stuff current twelve year olds are engrossed by. If they read the lore you loved when you were twelve, they would love it too. And see is all as part of the same whole. But also. Back when you were twelve, adults would have scoffed at the stuff you found enthralling, just as you do the same to the current generation of twelve year olds engrossed by the lore.

People get older, people's perception of life changes. Thst is all.

you want 12 year old kids to even look at the models then you have to slap some titties on them, other then that the average 12 year old will look at the game and go meh, look around you at your local gaming store how many 12 year olds play Warhammer? then look how many are playing Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh, then look around how many playing video games, miniatures you have to build and paint are not attracting kids, they don't want to play a game where you have to work to play, they want instant gratification when it comes to their gaming experience, not a slow build up.

and these are not my thoughts, these are what I see around me, hell my own nieces and nephews and such wouldn't even give 40K a second glance, i show them my minis and they go cool and then back to their pokemon games looking for pokemon.

and the reason the Theaters survive still today is because you can't get the DVD that fast yet (legally or good) and because everyhing else is just too small to watch a big movie on, me personally i haven't been to a theater in years but know it still has appeal.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Reavas wrote:
Unpopular opinion, but I prefer the new androgenous models for daemonettes, they are more in line with the fluff and makes sense.

I would not mind them so much if it where not for:
A) the terrible, static, poses. The Diaz models had life, they where twirling, swirling, leaping and bounding. They where dancing. The new ones are great clodhopping clubfooted and clumsy aberrations.
B) The awful piranha faces. They do not look good, they look bloody awful.

Oh I completely agree, I was arguing more in terms of their breasts being traded for a more deformed half male half female look, also their twisted faces I dont have too much of a problem with as it fits the vibe of a twisted distortion between facial features of both sexes. But the poses... dynamic poses for models give them life and portray character, necrons are conveyed to look slow and hunched, harlequines look agile and swift. The new daemonettes are just sorta are standing there or slowly walking rather than swiftly leaping and bounding. Poor design choice

 Yarium wrote:
I'm surprised how many people want 40k to go darker, grittier, and more okay with sexuality. I am 100% fine with those things, but I can't be selfish. 40k as a hobby needs to grow, and that means it needs to attract a younger audience in a target range. What range is that? I think it's 14-18. Young blood is necessary to make sure that the hobby carries forward, and GW's survival depends on that.

GW has a lot of leeway on its models and artistic depictions, but it has to avoid anything that would put it in the 18+ category. While slipping a boob may seem strange to us as being worse than telling a story about virus-bombing populations, the laws of many countries make it quite clear that, yes, that is the case from their perspective. So, guess what? It means GW needs to walk a fine line there.

It should not become grittier or more sexualized if that pushes the barrier of entry above 18 years old. Yes, the older crowds have more money to spend, but you need to bring people in young so they have the desire to grow their collection when they're older.

40k, as a hobby, has probably seen its golden years and is now in its twilight. It is going to need a complete overhaul, a la Dungeons & Dragons, to return to something like its previous prominence. Ironically, the state of the hobby is perfectly reflected in its fluff... the Imperium of Man, long past its prime and its best days naught but dim memories, is encircled by scores of rivals nipping at its flanks.

It's not the boob-plate, or the daemonettes, or the presence of Slaanesh that has moved the game into the state that it is in now. After all, during its heyday, there was more sex and violence in 40k than there is now.

Asterios wrote:

you want 12 year old kids to even look at the models then you have to slap some titties on them, other then that the average 12 year old will look at the game and go meh, look around you at your local gaming store how many 12 year olds play Warhammer?

Last time I was in Glasgow gw, I couldn't move for all the kids that's were packing the place.

And trust me, you're being a bit harsh towards twelve year olds. there are other things than... that ... that will draw them in.

Asterios wrote:

then look how many are playing Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh, then look around how many playing video games, miniatures you have to build and paint are not attracting kids, they don't want to play a game where you have to work to play, they want instant gratification when it comes to their gaming experience, not a slow build up.

There is nothing wrong with that. Like I said, this is a niche hobby. And always was. We are outliers as a whole. But this really want no different ten, twenty or even thirty years ago.

Asterios wrote:

and the reason the Theaters survive still today is because you can't get the DVD that fast yet (legally or good) and because everyhing else is just too small to watch a big movie on, me personally i haven't been to a theater in years but know it still has appeal.

Oh I think it's hilarious how someone who hasn't been to a theatre in years tries still to tell someone who actually likes the theatre why they like the theatre. And gets it so spectacularly wrong.

Theatres are great because it is a far more intimate experience than a DVD. Theatre only really comes to life on the stage, not on a small screen in your living room. It just does not work like that. At the end of the day, it's just a different and unique way of expressing a story, and if you've been to the likes of something like the lion king at the west end, you'd understand this - people often end up preferring the theatre experience to the animated movie. Or at the very least loving the experience and coming back again to see more of it. I know I did. And it's certainly not because I couldn't get the DVD or had read the book.

In any case, the theatre still has value. And it's adherents. Like I said, in an era of cinema and DVDs and video games. Table top wargames are exactly the same thing. There will always be adherents to something more traditional And old school, despite the existence of th latest power consoles and whatever else is out there.

Instead of declaring that all the fluff needs to be darker and edgier or lighter and softer, I think that it benefits from being more layered with multiple interpretations allowing players of different ages to decide how they want to be represented. A perfect example of this are the Tau, which on the surface appear to be a utopian meritocracy that are making it work while beset on all sides by their foes, but if you dig deeper there are hints at mind control, speciesism, and general hypocrisy. Younger players or players that enjoy the happier side of the universe get their heroes fighting for justice, while people that enjoy the darker tones get their hopeless moral myopia. The same applies to most other factions with Orks being comical, bumbling hooligans or an unstoppable force of destruction, Eldar being graceful beings fighting to survive or narcissists that would kill planets to save their own kind, and Grey Knights being the noble knights fighting daemons or genocidal maniacs.

The trick to saving the hobby is not to make it more niche by driving it towards either extreme, but to try and cast as wide a net as possible to catch as many players of different tastes as possible.

Asterios wrote:
you want 12 year old kids to even look at the models then you have to slap some titties on them

We know some very different twelve year olds.

Barring the fact that roughly half the human population has no interest in breasts (straight girls gay boys, various other sexual orientations/ preferences), the fact that at twelve most of these people will not have developed a sex drive, and the fact that these are tiny plastic models when the internet exists. . . and get get maybe a handful of people that you could appeal to in other ways that don't drive people away.

I think that the relatively early (70's-80's) Judge Dredd comics did it best. Very adult, serious themes. "Unfiltered" violence in the appropriate context. No white-washing of anything.

And absolutely no sexuality.

I can understand why the Dredd writers may have breached sexual themes later on (e.g., the rape scene in Judge Dredd: Origins comes to mind...for what it was, it was "tasteful" enough, I suppose), but still, I'm not a fan.

My sentiments are the same for 40k (especially the space marines) and for the judges: I signed up for an ultra-violent grim-dark setting in which the stars are basically celibate warrior monks.

I want the setting to mirror that.

Old stony face doesn't need to be more "human" or personable. Neither do the space marines. And neither do their settings.

And for feth's sake, absolutely no romance!

IoW:

No breasts. Lots of things like...punching Fear in the face.

No, I don't think GW should adjust lore to make it more kid friendly. There is a ton of excellent stuff in 40k, I'd hate to see it get watered down.

Deadnight wrote:

Asterios wrote:

you want 12 year old kids to even look at the models then you have to slap some titties on them, other then that the average 12 year old will look at the game and go meh, look around you at your local gaming store how many 12 year olds play Warhammer?

Last time I was in Glasgow gw, I couldn't move for all the kids that's were packing the place.

And trust me, you're being a bit harsh towards twelve year olds. there are other things than... that ... that will draw them in.

Asterios wrote:

then look how many are playing Magic or Yu-Gi-Oh, then look around how many playing video games, miniatures you have to build and paint are not attracting kids, they don't want to play a game where you have to work to play, they want instant gratification when it comes to their gaming experience, not a slow build up.

There is nothing wrong with that. Like I said, this is a niche hobby. And always was. We are outliers as a whole. But this really want no different ten, twenty or even thirty years ago.

Asterios wrote:

and the reason the Theaters survive still today is because you can't get the DVD that fast yet (legally or good) and because everyhing else is just too small to watch a big movie on, me personally i haven't been to a theater in years but know it still has appeal.

Oh I think it's hilarious how someone who hasn't been to a theatre in years tries still to tell someone who actually likes the theatre why they like the theatre. And gets it so spectacularly wrong.

Theatres are great because it is a far more intimate experience than a DVD. Theatre only really comes to life on the stage, not on a small screen in your living room. It just does not work like that. At the end of the day, it's just a different and unique way of expressing a story, and if you've been to the likes of something like the lion king at the west end, you'd understand this - people often end up preferring the theatre experience to the animated movie. Or at the very least loving the experience and coming back again to see more of it. I know I did. And it's certainly not because I couldn't get the DVD or had read the book.

In any case, the theatre still has value. And it's adherents. Like I said, in an era of cinema and DVDs and video games. Table top wargames are exactly the same thing. There will always be adherents to something more traditional And old school, despite the existence of th latest power consoles and whatever else is out there.

actually I prefer watching movies at home every now and then I get an early copy of a movie from a cousin or friend and can watch it in the comfort of my own home, can pause it when i want to get a snack or use the rest room, don't have to worry about the guy/girl explaining the movie 2 rows back, or the ones near me asking whats going on and so forth, theaters are not intimate, they are as intimate as a fast food place. then there is the cost of popcorn, soda and a candy there, last time me and the wife went to the movies it cost us about $40, last time I watched a movie at my place it was less then $10 and we had a better time too.

As to GW believe it or not they are struggling a bit this is shown by all their changes they are doing trying to make the game more interesting or intriguing, but they are still facing an uphill battle and kidifying the game will cost them even more. i'm not saying they need to bring sex to the game, it never had it when it was good so why have it now? and having boob armor on minis is not sexing it up either.

 the Signless wrote:

Asterios wrote:
you want 12 year old kids to even look at the models then you have to slap some titties on them

We know some very different twelve year olds.

Barring the fact that roughly half the human population has no interest in breasts (straight girls gay boys, various other sexual orientations/ preferences), the fact that at twelve most of these people will not have developed a sex drive, and the fact that these are tiny plastic models when the internet exists. . . and get get maybe a handful of people that you could appeal to in other ways that don't drive people away.

thats why they are going to be teaching sex ed classes and giving out condoms in middle school? trust me at 12 kids are developing a sex drive.

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. Lore-wise it doesn't need to get darker than the existing dark things, but "grimdark" needs to mean more than "heroic space marines doing heroic things, but MOAR SKULLS EVERYWHERE". But where the game needs to be more adult-oriented is in the rules. GW is catering to kids way too much with the current rules and it's dragging down the game for the rest of us.

?????????? What? So the 500 pages of rules and 140 pages of FAQs are catering to kids? That's just silly, excessive RNG may not be good game design, but it's certainly not catering. You ever seen a kid get BFed by RNG? They'll stop playing tabletop games FOREVER over that gak. The game isn't catering to kids it's honestly so confused at this point it doesn't know WHO it's built for anymore.

I suppose the short answer is yes, but to elaborate a bit, I wish the current writing wasn't so immature (for lack of a better word).

I read a Forge World book, and I see this insane creativity and effort going into crafting the narrative, history of the Heresy, or story of the Siege of Vraks, and then I read Traitor's Hate and it seems like something a high school student would write. Maybe I personally couldn't do better, but clearly people within company (by extension FW) certainly can. But I bought the book, as did plenty of others, so clearly we're eating it up.

bah wrong topic.

ERJAK wrote:
?????????? What? So the 500 pages of rules and 140 pages of FAQs are catering to kids? That's just silly, excessive RNG may not be good game design, but it's certainly not catering. You ever seen a kid get BFed by RNG? They'll stop playing tabletop games FOREVER over that gak. The game isn't catering to kids it's honestly so confused at this point it doesn't know WHO it's built for anymore.

Yes, it's catering to kids. Not all kids, but the kind of kids that will talk at you for hours about every possible boring detail of their favorite thing. They'll memorize all 500 pages of the rules and love it, because it's so many awesome special rules to learn and so many ways that their bestest army ever is totally going to beat you every game. And the excessive randomness removes as much skill as possible so that even kids, with their poor ability to grasp strategy, can win half the time against older opponents. Sure, the kids will sometimes get frustrated by RNG, but there's so much more RNG that they'll quickly have something to be excited about. It's the same reason why kids enjoy playing games that are literally "roll a die to see how many spaces you move", you get all the excitement of "winning" a real game but no matter how much you suck at it you still get to win.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asterios wrote:
actually I prefer watching movies at home every now and then I get an early copy of a movie from a cousin or friend and can watch it in the comfort of my own home, can pause it when i want to get a snack or use the rest room, don't have to worry about the guy/girl explaining the movie 2 rows back, or the ones near me asking whats going on and so forth, theaters are not intimate, they are as intimate as a fast food place. then there is the cost of popcorn, soda and a candy there, last time me and the wife went to the movies it cost us about $40, last time I watched a movie at my place it was less then $10 and we had a better time too.

You do understand that they're talking about theater, as in actors on a stage performing a play, not watching movies on a bigger screen, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Traditio wrote:
I think that the relatively early (70's-80's) Judge Dredd comics did it best. Very adult, serious themes. "Unfiltered" violence in the appropriate context. No white-washing of anything.

And absolutely no sexuality.

Yes, we know you have some weird issues with sex, especially anything your religion declares to be immoral sex. But for the rest of us sex and relationships are things that exist. I don't necessarily want to see space marine orgies on every page (though let's be honest, there's probably a lot of that happening "off screen"), but you get really shallow and boring fluff when you pretend that humans are nothing more than mindless killing machines. Good fluff involves characters, not merely dry explanations of exactly how the Ultramarines™ Chapter™ Space™ Marine™ Captain™ decapitated a Necron™ Warrior™ with his Power™ Axe™, complete with links to buy the appropriate Citadel™ Multi-Part™ Plastic™ Miniatures™ at your local Games™ Workshop™ Hobby™ Center™.

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
actually I prefer watching movies at home every now and then I get an early copy of a movie from a cousin or friend and can watch it in the comfort of my own home, can pause it when i want to get a snack or use the rest room, don't have to worry about the guy/girl explaining the movie 2 rows back, or the ones near me asking whats going on and so forth, theaters are not intimate, they are as intimate as a fast food place. then there is the cost of popcorn, soda and a candy there, last time me and the wife went to the movies it cost us about $40, last time I watched a movie at my place it was less then $10 and we had a better time too.

You do understand that they're talking about theater, as in actors on a stage performing a play, not watching movies on a bigger screen, right?

pretty sure we were talking about movies.

Peregrine wrote:Yes, we know you have some weird issues with sex, especially anything your religion declares to be immoral sex. But for the rest of us sex and relationships are things that exist. I don't necessarily want to see space marine orgies on every page (though let's be honest, there's probably a lot of that happening "off screen"), but you get really shallow and boring fluff when you pretend that humans are nothing more than mindless killing machines. Good fluff involves characters, not merely dry explanations of exactly how the Ultramarines™ Chapter™ Space™ Marine™ Captain™ decapitated a Necron™ Warrior™ with his Power™ Axe™, complete with links to buy the appropriate Citadel™ Multi-Part™ Plastic™ Miniatures™ at your local Games™ Workshop™ Hobby™ Center™.

Do you think that the Judge Dredd series suffers because the judges are supposed to be celibate, and the main character actually follows that rule?

The Dredd 3D movie wouldn't have been particularly harmed if they would have removed what relatively little sexual overtones there were in the movie out entirely. Was the mind-rape bit really needed?

I say no.

They easily could have replaced that with Dredd shooting more people.

I mean, they showed him using his incendiary rounds against perps. Couldn't they have shown them burning alive for just a little bit longer instead?

 Traditio wrote:
Do you think that the Judge Dredd series suffers because the judges are supposed to be celibate, and the main character actually follows that rule?

I don't know, I don't follow Judge Dredd at all. But remember that space marines and SoB are the only factions that could be reasonably argued to be celibate. And maybe add in Necrons, depending on how you interpret them losing their minds and sanity (though they're terrible characters anyway and the fluff wouldn't lose much if they disappeared). IG, Eldar and Tau are all normal "people" with normal sex drives, Chaos has tons of potential to be absolutely obsessed with sex, and Tyranids and Orks would have the normal sex/reproductive instincts of mindless beasts. And even with space marines you're kind of assuming things by declaring them to be celibate. Based on their whole "brotherhood of bromance" thing and Greek/Roman inspiration it would make a lot of sense for even loyalist space marines to be having lots of gay sex. FFS, there's even a space marine chapter with a primarch named after a famous gay poet and a chapter name taken from his famous poem about struggling with homosexuality.

And, honestly, I find it a bit disturbing that you're so repulsed by the idea of sex existing and so bloodthirsty about the idea of getting to watch "bad guys" being burned to death.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asterios wrote:
pretty sure we were talking about movies.

Quote:

Theatres are great because it is a far more intimate experience than a DVD. Theatre only really comes to life on the stage, not on a small screen in your living room. It just does not work like that. At the end of the day, it's just a different and unique way of expressing a story, and if you've been to the likes of something like the lion king at the west end, you'd understand this - people often end up preferring the theatre experience to the animated movie. Or at the very least loving the experience and coming back again to see more of it. I know I did. And it's certainly not because I couldn't get the DVD or had read the book.

So let me get this straight, people want adult themes but they don't want sex and romance despite that being an important component in adulthood, I mean you can't have it both ways.

Yes. I would love to see it have more mature content, like sex, mature language and other things like that. The brutal content is there already, GW could very well stopped pretending that this is a game for kids.

I'd have to make the argument that Orks, due to being angry mushrooms that release spores periodically and a massive burst upon death, do not actually have normal sexual/reproductive instincts, in addition to lacking self-preservation.
Most Tyranids (other than Hormagaunts and Gargoyles) completely lack functioning digestive systems, let alone reproductive systems, and cannot reproduce. Hormagaunts and Gargoyles lay eggs, yes.
Humans, Eldar, of course! Source: Gaunt's Ghosts and Path of the Eldar/Dark Eldar + random short story in Fear the Alien. Just in case Traditio tries to point out lack of source.

In my eyes, Gaunt's Ghosts pretty much executes 40k in a mature manner quite well. There are things like shell-shock, human, emotional characters, violence, atrocity, tasteful sex, and logical (oxymoron) depictions of chaos. Bonus points for showing how Chaos' logistics work.

 Cheesecat wrote:
So let me get this straight, people want adult themes but they don't want sex and romance despite that being an important component in adulthood, I mean you can't have it both ways.

You can't have extreme, gratuitous violence without sex and romance?

I beg to differ.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Peregrine wrote:I don't know, I don't follow Judge Dredd at all. But remember that space marines and SoB are the only factions that could be reasonably argued to be celibate. And maybe add in Necrons, depending on how you interpret them losing their minds and sanity (though they're terrible characters anyway and the fluff wouldn't lose much if they disappeared). IG, Eldar and Tau are all normal "people" with normal sex drives, Chaos has tons of potential to be absolutely obsessed with sex, and Tyranids and Orks would have the normal sex/reproductive instincts of mindless beasts. And even with space marines you're kind of assuming things by declaring them to be celibate. Based on their whole "brotherhood of bromance" thing and Greek/Roman inspiration it would make a lot of sense for even loyalist space marines to be having lots of gay sex. FFS, there's even a space marine chapter with a primarch named after a famous gay poet and a chapter name taken from his famous poem about struggling with homosexuality.

Quick note: There's no fething way that Necrons and Orks are engaging in sexual intercourse. Necrons are basically robots, and orks are fungi. They reproduce by spore emissions. I mean, in a sense, practically every "normal" battle is an orgy for an ork. Don't bring flamethrowers, lascannons, or anything else that might prevent the spore emissions, and the orks are having a grand old time.

But fair enough on my interjecting too much into the space marine characters.

But here's the point that I'm ultimately making. What is so attractive about the 40k universe? Its setting as a sci-fi "total war" type universe. I think that the Space Marine video game pulled this off really well. I don't care about a single individual in that game, especially those insignificant guardsmen, except to the extent that they are somehow involved or otherwise related to violence, sweet, delicious, scrumptious violence.

I don't want to hear about that innocent bystander was in love with so and so and blah blah blah. I do want to hear about what she thought about in her last moments right before da boyz cornered her and WAAAAAGHed her to death. And the more graphic the description of her fear and desperation, and her subsequent dispatching, the better.

I don't want to hear about a space marine's romantic life. That's not why I like the character concept. Just like Joseph Dredd the guy doesn't matter, I don't care about space marines as individuals. I only care about them insofar as they are the Emperor's angels of death who bring swift and righteous judgment and a quick, merciful death to the aliens and the heretics.

I mean, I suppose an author could pursue a romance plot on some backwards hive world somewhere, or between a couple of eldar.

But that's not what 40k is "about." That's not what one "buys into" when one gets into 40k. "In the grim darkness of the future, there is only war."

So, do show me about how those worthless maggots in the imperial guard can't even do their job right, their one job, of dying for the Emperor, and show me about how the angels of death came in to save the day and genocide the aliens.

...Romance? Eh...no.

Judge Dredd is SUPPOSED to be two dimensional. 40k is SUPPOSED to be two-dimensional.

I want grim-dark futuristic war. That's what they advertised.

Spare me the sexual stuff. Give me MOAR gratuitous violence. Give me ALL of the gratuitous violence!

And, honestly, I find it a bit disturbing that you're so repulsed by the idea of sex existing and so bloodthirsty about the idea of getting to watch "bad guys" being burned to death.

It's a great scene! It could have been longer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQw5VlfYDTw


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Imho, GW could probably rebrand slaneesh. Replace the "drugs, sex and rock and roll" with something that involves good, honest, clean extreme violence.

Asterios wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
actually I prefer watching movies at home every now and then I get an early copy of a movie from a cousin or friend and can watch it in the comfort of my own home, can pause it when i want to get a snack or use the rest room, don't have to worry about the guy/girl explaining the movie 2 rows back, or the ones near me asking whats going on and so forth, theaters are not intimate, they are as intimate as a fast food place. then there is the cost of popcorn, soda and a candy there, last time me and the wife went to the movies it cost us about $40, last time I watched a movie at my place it was less then $10 and we had a better time too.

You do understand that they're talking about theater, as in actors on a stage performing a play, not watching movies on a bigger screen, right?

pretty sure we were talking about movies.

Nope.

You might have been. I was talking about the the theatre. What you are talking about is the cinema.

Big difference.

I kind of like how the background at the moment is pretty light on the surface for kids, but how if you keep digging it slowly gets darker and at times a bit messed up.

I'd rather see it go that way rather than leaning one way or the other.

 Traditio wrote:
I don't want to hear about that innocent bystander was in love with so and so and blah blah blah. I do want to hear about what she thought about in her last moments right before da boyz cornered her and WAAAAAGHed her to death. And the more graphic the description of her fear and desperation, and her subsequent dispatching, the better.

But without love or any other humanizing elements why does the audience care about the poor bystander's death? It's just kill count +1, and the boyz squad levels up to become nobz and get +1 LD. With ™s everywhere, because selling Games™ Workshop™ Products™ is important! And when you add all that graphic violence it becomes little more than torture porn. It has plenty of shock value, but its literary merit is somewhere around the level of the average thread in the battle reports section.

I don't want to hear about a space marine's romantic life. That's not why I like the character concept. Just like Joseph Dredd the guy doesn't matter, I don't care about space marines as individuals. I only care about them insofar as they are the Emperor's angels of death who bring swift and righteous judgment and a quick, merciful death to the aliens and the heretics.

Which, IMO, is boring as hell. And, unfortunately, it's a problem that GW's fluff often suffers from. Space marines that aren't individuals aren't characters, they're just stat lines with a bunch of ™s everywhere and a boring account of how many 3+s they rolled to hit. There's no reason to care whether they win or lose because they're just abstract numbers in a list of casualties suffered and inflicted. Reading the average business spreadsheet is more entertaining than that.

When space marines are done well they do matter as individuals. You care about them because of their loyalty to their comrades, their struggle to be heroes in a setting where heroes can not exist, etc. And when the main character's squad-mate is killed in battle you care because it's the man he loved, not just another anonymous MEQ stat line removed as a casualty.

Imho, GW could probably rebrand slaneesh. Replace the "drugs, sex and rock and roll" with something that involves good, honest, clean extreme violence.

That would be Khorne you're thinking of.

 Traditio wrote:
Imho, GW could probably rebrand slaneesh. Replace the "drugs, sex and rock and roll" with something that involves good, honest, clean extreme violence.

Well Slaanesh is meant to be the extreme in all things, just GW seems to narrow in on one aspect of it too much.

People who seriously believe Slaanesh is nothing but "drugs, sex, and rock'n'roll" don't have a good handle on the fluff.

If you understood what Slaanesh actually represented, you'd understand that Slaanesh is one of the deeper, darker, Chaos elements.

The great part of the 40k fluff is that there's surface elements we can joke about (drugs and sex for Slaanesh), but then look at the deeper themes for something more mature.

Chaos gods are multi-faceted. Even Khorne represents more than "SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE" and "BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD".

Yeah, like the Chaos gods also take in more positive emotions as well; such as Khorne with honour. Which is what makes them such a ever present threat to humanity over all the others scuttling around because chaos can never truly ever stop existing as a threat until humanity ceases to exist. That's if it doesn't latch onto another race as well before that.

Slaanesh feeds off stuff like a proud warrior getting a bit too proud of his skills and actually enjoys slowly corrupting noble heroes like this rather sadistically. Plus I think Slaanesh has the most interesting realm of the four, punishing whatever excess the mortal had specifically as a way of subjecting them to trials. Whether it'd be subjecting a governor who wants popularity to spend eternity having that but being paranoid of everyone and slowly driven insane from it, to just outright turning people into statues of gold for picking up even a single coin in a huge area of treasure. A peaceful looking beach where if you even stop for a moment to rest you'll be stuck in an unending sleep.

Basically Slaanesh likes to torment them with what they coveted the most.

Its also the feeling of never quite enough. Nothing anyone under Slaanesh can ever do to truly satisfy themselves. Its drinking everything you've ever loved but still being thirsty.

 Traditio wrote:

Imho, GW could probably rebrand slaneesh. Replace the "drugs, sex and rock and roll" with something that involves good, honest, clean extreme violence.

There's a lot more to Slaanesh than that; in fact, the mention of those kinds of overindulgence in the lore is fairly minimal. The main theme with Slaanesh as a whole is giving in to your pure desires and subsequently becoming a slave to her/him - drugs and sex are just a small part of it that seems to have been exaggerated by people.

Anyways, Peregrine makes a good point about emotional stakes in 40k not being there a lot of the time - any character in any work of fiction needs some kind of emotion to be loved or hated by the reader. To this day my favourite example of 40k writing done well is the videogame Space Marine. On the surface, the characters seem fairly pedestrian (frankly most of them are). However, on closer inspection, you'll find that the protagonist, Captain Titus, is perhaps the most likeable Space Marine you'll come across, certainly the best Ultramarine. If his willingness to defy the Codex Astartes and a resistance to the Warp was not enough, he shows incredible loyalty and protection towards both his brothers and the Guardsman Lieutenant he fought beside. Even after being sold out to the Inquisition by one of his brothers, after saving an entire world from destruction, he insisted that the Inquisition left them alone if he was to come with them (most likely a death sentence, given that this is the Inquisition, to turn yourself over as a "heretic"). He also said something to his backturning brother that is perhaps my favourite quote ever in 40K:

"The Codex Astartes is a set of rules. They guide us, shape us as Ultramarines, teach us to hold duty and honour sacred above all. But how we live with those rules is the true test of a Space Marine. And you have failed".

The cutscene in question, if anyone hasn't seen it already. Do I need to say "spoilers" for a half decade old game?


40k needs more characters like that; a lot of literature I've read from the 40k series has been forgotten months later, but the events of Space Marine have always stuck with me. Death, Bolters and explosions won't sell a character for you in 40k, and a lot of writers think that it can unfortunately.

Yeah, like with that proud warrior example. They'd keep wanting to get better and better and better and will never be satisfied with their skills; and that's usually when they fall to Slaanesh offering to help them get to that skill level and even then they never will.

Not sure if it's been said but:

Clearly the violence, the brutality, the dark themes of betrayal and insanity and what not are still here.

We're talking sexuality here, and whilst we can go on all day about ridiculous double standards between depictions of violence vs depictions of sexuality but the thing is

It's not just sexuality. It's not in a vacuum here. The problem is sexual(ized) violence.

This is a war game, and as such, the main focus is fighting, and violence. You throw sexuality into the mix, and stuff gets dark quick. It's not just a naked woman, it's not models depicted having normal, consensual sex. Especially given the vast majority of sexual themed models and concepts revolve around Slaneesh, stuff stops being about "just a titty" real quick.

And the thing is, that stuff is still in the lore. The books will detail darker aspects of humanity because it's an unfortunate truth of reality, and it's straight up scary too. But there is a big difference between a talented writer handling complex issues with some form of restraint and tact, and a bunch of us neckbeard looking dudes pushing round their lovingly painted heaving giant tittied demon women getting gorely speared or a bunch of 'roided out muscular Chaos Warriors with combat peens, yknow?

It's not even about kids. I'm a full grown adult, and I don't need to see that crap

i'd realy prefer to have a more aduls 40k lore

thake for example Game of thrones. its highly aduly. each charakter is a complex beeing. driven by emotions and such. of course. its not realy needed to show all that sex. doing the same and only hinting would be fine as well

the important part is. and this make it an aduld one : complexity. we get to know why there is conflikt. and also how each one is driven into it.

this is a much better showing of humand than in 40k. and i miss that part. i am tired of reading pages of pages of "bolter--porn"

Im fine with the game being PG13.

sexually suggestive is fine but i dont need boobs hanging out and making it REALLY awkward to bring these models out in public. regardless of if its art or not.

 n0t_u wrote:
Yeah, like with that proud warrior example. They'd keep wanting to get better and better and better and will never be satisfied with their skills; and that's usually when they fall to Slaanesh offering to help them get to that skill level and even then they never will.

As opposed to the Black Templars, who are already servants of Khorne?

Absolutely make it more mature. I mean they've more or less priced out anyone who isn't on salary pay.

 General Annoyance wrote:

"The Codex Astartes is a set of rules. They guide us, shape us as Ultramarines, teach us to hold duty and honour sacred above all. But how we live with those rules is the true test of a Space Marine. And you have failed".

The cutscene in question, if anyone hasn't seen it already. Do I need to say "spoilers" for a half decade old game?


40k needs more characters like that; a lot of literature I've read from the 40k series has been forgotten months later, but the events of Space Marine have always stuck with me. Death, Bolters and explosions won't sell a character for you in 40k, and a lot of writers think that it can unfortunately.

ugh that clip was an abomination of what the Space Marines are .

@OP

I voted other because:

More grimdark? Definately. Exploring more complex themes? Yeah, sign me up. More grey than classic kids' cartoon black and white good against evil? Absolutely. More complicated stories with a better grasp on all of the multi-faceted aspects of psychology? Wonderful.

More cheesecake? Hell no.

"in the grim darkness of the future there is only war!" Is the tagline for the game. Its mindless drones in an endless war, with the occasional heroic figure rising above and doing some insane feat. Do I need to know their hopes, dreams, and aspirations? Do I need to know how they are in the sheets? I don't need this stuff when I play Halo, Doom, Starcraft, Battlefield, etc and I don't see the need for it in 40k. Its a tabletop wargame, not an rpg. I could maybe understand this stuff needing to be fleshed out in the pen and paper rpgs like Dark Heresy but not in a game of moving miniatures and rolling dice.

It just adds nothing to the game. Emotional investment? I play orks, where my models die in the handfuls. I don't have time for emotional investment.

I feel like the game is more of a backdrop for your own personal games with friends. Here are the armies involved and the systems they inhabit, now think of a reason for them to fight and go at it. Complex themes aren't really all that necessary in that scenario.

 Peregrine wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
?????????? What? So the 500 pages of rules and 140 pages of FAQs are catering to kids? That's just silly, excessive RNG may not be good game design, but it's certainly not catering. You ever seen a kid get BFed by RNG? They'll stop playing tabletop games FOREVER over that gak. The game isn't catering to kids it's honestly so confused at this point it doesn't know WHO it's built for anymore.

Yes, it's catering to kids. Not all kids, but the kind of kids that will talk at you for hours about every possible boring detail of their favorite thing. They'll memorize all 500 pages of the rules and love it, because it's so many awesome special rules to learn and so many ways that their bestest army ever is totally going to beat you every game. And the excessive randomness removes as much skill as possible so that even kids, with their poor ability to grasp strategy, can win half the time against older opponents. Sure, the kids will sometimes get frustrated by RNG, but there's so much more RNG that they'll quickly have something to be excited about. It's the same reason why kids enjoy playing games that are literally "roll a die to see how many spaces you move", you get all the excitement of "winning" a real game but no matter how much you suck at it you still get to win.

You're not describing children, you're actually describing every nerd who picks up a game they aren't very good at. Kids aren't madcap memorization machines and 40k's rules are so dry that getting through the whole book is pain for anyone. And if a kid does actually have what it takes to memorize the rules, he probably has the capacity for strategy (which is honestly not terribly complex 'kill scary thing, get on objective' is enough to take an rtt most of the time.)


And you're also wrong about the excessive RNG. Yes RNG can heavily flip a game in 40k and yes there is just tons of it at a casual level but the balance is so bad that it takes a crap ton of effort to get to the point where any dice rolls make a difference. A casual game between riptide markerlight tau and dark eldar jet bikes isn't usually decided by which warlord trait you roll.

Beyond even that, most armies at a competitive level don't actually deal with RNG much, Seize and first turn being the only real constants. Deathstar armies have a massive number of chances to get the powers they want and only really NEED 1 or 2 anyway, save rolls are generally 2++ with a reroll which basically eliminates that 1 lucky shot chance, most stars will also have FNP which is another layer of nope and most have a decent amount of built in redundancy. Shooting armies like gladius, tau, or eldar withh be rerolling almost everything or hitting/wounding on 2s or both with all but invul saves being completely ignored.

So I'm sorry your aspiring champion's plasma pistol got hot and cost you the game that one time, but in general a high level competitive game is determined by army list and player skill far more than RNG even with seizing being a thing.

eh, I'm just here for the violence - I've got other avenues for the sex and other stuff.

I'd like for 40K's writing to back away from the some of the Saturday-Morning-Cartoon models of late and go back to the more sinister aspects of the game; the Space Marines are as much a symbol of what is wrong with the empire moreso than they fix things; being in the Imperial Guard is a death sentence simply waiting for the executioner to show up; the Eldar slip into melancholy as they watch their brethren lost to unending conflict; Orks are thugs and murderers whose only desire is for bloodshed. And the tyranids aren't just going to eat you, they're going to use your flesh and bones to build more of them and their weapons, and your offspring will be slaves to a cult that will bring destruction to your kin on other worlds.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
Yeah, like with that proud warrior example. They'd keep wanting to get better and better and better and will never be satisfied with their skills; and that's usually when they fall to Slaanesh offering to help them get to that skill level and even then they never will.

As opposed to the Black Templars, who are already servants of Khorne?

Only if they chose to be, they would just be targets for him until then. That's just how they seem to work.

Peregrine wrote:But without love or any other humanizing elements why does the audience care about the poor bystander's death?

I think this comes down to setting vs. personality. In the Judge Dredd series, the personality of Dredd doesn't really matter. What matters is the setting: Mega City 1, the Cursed Earth, the East Megs, the Judges, etc.

Joseph Dredd doesn't really matter, except insofar as he is the strictest, most hardcore judge in Mega City 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbcoOqGKFi8

When you read a Judge Dredd comic, Dredd doesn't matter so much as the setting does. At the end of the day, Judge Dredd is just one face (or lack thereof) among many. He represents the Mega-City 1 legal system in all of its ideological purity. That's it.

At least, until the pro-democracy story arcs...but then, imho, that's where the story starts to break down.

When you get right down to it, Judge Dredd doesn't have "love or any other humanizing elements." All of that is locked behind his helmet. Who knows what his internal life is like? He rarely display any of that, and in the rare events that he does, it's only to show that he values his duty more than he values himself.

In the Vienna story, e.g., when he refuses to see his niece any more after she gets kidnapped because of him:

"You don't understand. I'm a judge. Some day, I too will be killed [in the line of duty]. I've put her through enough."

This is well displayed in the scene with him and cadet Anderson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbcoOqGKFi8

Sure, there's doubt. That's what Anderson is about to say right before she gets cut off. But she doesn't get to say it. And it's completely hidden behind Dredd's helmet. Because ultimately, it's irrelevant to the main storyline. What matters are the lawbreakers who need bullets in their skulls.

For all story purposes, he is anger/law/justice incarnate. "Old Stoney Face." In the words of Walter his robotic servant, "my angry master!"

40k is similar. 40k is all about the setting. It's not about the individual characters. In fact, I find your desire to "humanize" 40k to be completely contrary to what 40k is all about. Commissar Expendable doesn't matter as an individual personality.

The 40k setting is inhuman. That's what it's all about.

If by "Adult orientated" you mean more like the Realm of Chaos books then I'm all for it