Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
I do feel the baseline 40k stuff is becoming a bit less grim, and I am not thrilled with some of the new aesthetics of the marines. But thanks to Necromunda i'd say the dystopia and stuff is still much alive. The lore of the corpse grinder cults is certainly grim. Honestly if it wasn't for specialist games I probably wouldn't be too thrilled with GW as a company at all right now.
Short answer, yes. Longer answer, it doesn't appeal to happier people it just is going more bland and generic after all the time spent to grim dark it up. I don't much appreciate the feels.
It's a process happening slowly but it's there.
I couldn't be less thrilled with space marine action figures or the like of this silly stuff. If they are trying so hard to hook the little ones you can tell the kid friendly re education is on the way for 40k.
Tau have been around for nearly 20 years now, and their Psychic Awakening Book brought them to reality with a bump.
40k remains an absolute hellscape, where untold billions toil their lives away, never seeing the sun, and where planetary invasion can happen at any time.
Yeah, if anything the imperium got an even worse place with 8th edition with half of it being exposed to daemonic incursions and the other half being under constant siege by Chaos and Xenos while lifes are still worthless to the imperial warmachine.
That being said I have the feeling they're pushing back the aspect of the imperium being that terrible dogmatic fascist regime it was before. Guilliman tries to change the Imperium and so far his only problem seems to be that his progress happens really slowly. He can't destroy the "Imperial truth"/ the ecclesiarchy and has to do an arrangement with them. But his Primaris are undefeated and don't fall to Chaos and overall every decisive battle is again won by the Imperium, even if it's through pyrrhic victories (as usual).
When it first started, war hammer was a caricature of fantasy (and then science fiction). It was quite obviously lifted from the popular themes in the era, then made more extreme. I will set aside all the attempts by GW suits to appropriate them as trademarks. That was just business, but quite obviously not how it started.
I am not in touch with current science fiction themes (or fantasy) but maybe they have changed too? Could that be the reason?
Model wise? You merely have to look at the Sisters of Battle to see an army that is the complete personification of all thas is imperium and grimdark.
Lore wise? Yes and no. In Imperium Nihilus (dark imperium) things are bad and it is here that people who treasure a grimdark universe reside. On the other side of the rift you got rowboat doing his stuff I don't care about and generally this area feels more like baby's first grimdark.
With GW focusing on narrative and not on setting, things get focused on the characters like rowboat so we get a wash of diet grimdark.
Let's face it, GW want lil Timmys parents money and they can't have things too grimdark or monstrous otherwise little Timmys parents won't like him getting into it. /jadedopinion
I think so, and it's not happening whole sale it's happening slowly. However you can't ignore the much more kiddy nature of recent things, little chibi marines, action figures, etc, etc. You could say its just marketing and part of it is but it also seems a direct press in a certain direction.
I never saw the Tau as not grim dark really, just really good liars and they did awful things before in the fluff PA wasn't some revelation they aren't all good if you paid attention before.
The combat tends to feel more over the top hero movie/action movie in the more current art. The marines straight up feel and are portrayed as heroes as opposed to the bio enhanced psycho killers they are or were I guess at this point.
Just because the imperium is in worse footing at the moment, they also have some very good stuff working for them, marines are getting ever stronger and more amazing, they are making new technological presses forward, doesn't feel that lacking in hope to me.
As well, there is a thing about making your enemies seem amazing and powerful so when you defeat them it makes you look even better. For all this bad the imperium is in, they've also never been safer as all these world teeter on the brink yet most never fall or are outright saved, at least once the primaris arrive.
Much has changed since I started playing but if you've only played for a couple editions you may not notice how it's changing. It's all about time spent to notice the changes from say 3rd ed in my case, till now.
Some of the lore looks strangely like old sci fi, or history books with its gulags in space. But stories that are good, tend to have a similar core, so am not claiming that someone at GW set down and just copied ancient comics and books.
Am not sure about the light or funny stuff. I generaly don't get the funny stuff, and nothing in W40k seems very light. now they seem to be wierd lore changes, made only to have a 100% covarge of marine factions taking primaris, even if it makes no sense. But my mom always says money>ideology. So of course GW would change the lore to maximize the sells. In 2-3 years when almost non who played with classic marines, it won't even matter much if primaris are in the setting and what they do in it.
Makes sense US is a much bigger market. Although I do not envy anyone who has to make stuff for people in the US, the social regulations on what you can or can not do seems to be a minefield.
I think it depends on what sources you're looking at. A lot of the new lore does seem a little less grimdark, but there's some stuff that's pretty hard to tone down.
Some of the new stuff may seem to have become a little bit like a superhero comic, but a lot of things can't be cleaned up and made palatable for the masses.
Guilliman may=Captain America to some people, but Night Lords still = Crossed. And mom and dad ain't buying junior that comic.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Makes sense US is a much bigger market. Although I do not envy anyone who has to make stuff for people in the US, the social regulations on what you can or can not do seems to be a minefield.
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
Tau have been around for nearly 20 years now, and their Psychic Awakening Book brought them to reality with a bump.
40k remains an absolute hellscape, where untold billions toil their lives away, never seeing the sun, and where planetary invasion can happen at any time.
This. The fundamental essence of the setting, the "humanity barely getting by, even after doing brutal and horrific things" is very much alive and well.
AngryAngel80 wrote:I think so, and it's not happening whole sale it's happening slowly. However you can't ignore the much more kiddy nature of recent things, little chibi marines, action figures, etc, etc. You could say its just marketing and part of it is but it also seems a direct press in a certain direction.
I think that's very much a marketing and funny gimmick. Quite a few collectors of 40k stuff like having the funny designs. It's just getting the 40k designs out there into other domains.
The combat tends to feel more over the top hero movie/action movie in the more current art. The marines straight up feel and are portrayed as heroes as opposed to the bio enhanced psycho killers they are or were I guess at this point.
In my experience of 40k fluff, Space Marines have always been portrayed as straight up heroes, for well over a decade. In fact, modern fluff actually puts Marines (and the Imperium) in a more introspective light - in older books, the vast majority seem to be just simply "here's a cool action story". Nowadays, I seem to be seeing stories which have a lot more character and personality in them, and actually touch on themes, however lightly.
For me, I don't really remember a time when Space Marines weren't always immediately marketed as "heroes", with the more shady lore just beneath the surface - and I don't think that's changed.
So perhaps at the table top and you store things are less grim but they keep it in the lore for those of us who want to go there?
My example of the tau wasn’t the best, I know, and I forget how long they have been around but I do wonder if the introduction of the tau with their look made GW realise something about marketing and expanding their customer base
Grimdark is in no way going away, unless you somehow believe the recent Mortifactor/Pentitent Engine kit was happy-joy-joy shiny fun-filled and kid friendly.
Gadzilla666 785726 10723600 wrote:
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
I don't know what a gorgoroth is.
A heavy metal band who recorded a concert in Poland for a live DVD only to be arrested and have all the footage seized because it was considered by the authorities to be offensive to religion. That wouldn't happen in America.
Back to the point, even if some of the new lore may seem a little more friendly there's plenty of dark stuff going on. Or has the Imperium stopped feeding the Emperor 1,000 psyker's souls daily? A lot of 40k would require a full retcon to be considered "main stream".
Back to the point, even if some of the new lore may seem a little more friendly there's plenty of dark stuff going on. Or has the Imperium stopped feeding the Emperor 1,000 psyker's souls daily? A lot of 40k would require a full retcon to be considered "main stream".
GW has always been pretty manstream, or at least that's how it developed originally. Of course, mainstream within more nerdy circles.
Original GW stuff was simply an appropriation of the main themes present in fantasy and sci fi at the time, and made even more extreme. It was like this movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scary_Movie but to the RPG / role play / wargame community.
If it was dark, it was simply reflection of the darkness of those themes.
Now, how dark / not dark are current sci fi / fantasy novels and culture? IMHO that's where we'd get the answer to whether GW is going less grim dark or not as a conscious strategy.
Gadzilla666 785726 10723600 wrote:
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
I don't know what a gorgoroth is.
A heavy metal band who recorded a concert in Poland for a live DVD only to be arrested and have all the footage seized because it was considered by the authorities to be offensive to religion. That wouldn't happen in America.
Ah stuff like that, yeah you get for prison for offending religion here. But you have the exact same thing, just not for catholics.
Back to the point, even if some of the new lore may seem a little more friendly there's plenty of dark stuff going on. Or has the Imperium stopped feeding the Emperor 1,000 psyker's souls daily? A lot of 40k would require a full retcon to be considered "main stream".
GW has always been pretty manstream, or at least that's how it developed originally. Of course, mainstream within more nerdy circles.
Original GW stuff was simply an appropriation of the main themes present in fantasy and sci fi at the time, and made even more extreme. It was like this movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scary_Movie but to the RPG / role play / wargame community.
If it was dark, it was simply reflection of the darkness of those themes.
Now, how dark / not dark are current sci fi / fantasy novels and culture? IMHO that's where we'd get the answer to whether GW is going less grim dark or not as a conscious strategy.
Well, one of the most popular shows on TV is about a zombie apocalypse. Another, and the books it's based on, is a fantasy full of brutal murders, entire cities being burnt to the ground etc. We even have a teenie bopper movie series about a dystopian society where children are forced to fight to the death for the survival of their people. So I'd say current scifi/fantasy can be pretty dark at times.
I don't think 40K is any less Grimdark. I just think that GW has placed a shiny heroic veneer on top of the Grimdarkness.
Take Vigilus for example. It can look like a heroic tale of how Marneous Calgar heroically defeated Abbadon and his Black Legion and the forces of Chaos, the Orks, and the Genestealer Cults form capturing this critical planet.
Or you can look below the surface and look at all the carnage that took place to accomplish this small victory. And how long will it be before another Chaos force comes along to capture this depleted world that has been ravaged by forces within and without? Was it even a victory for the Imperium at all given the cost?
I don't think GW is trying to tone down the grimdark, but perhaps make it less obvious at a first glance. The undertones are still there, but they aren't parading them through the streets quite as much. Which is fine because presenting hope only makes the darkness more prominent.
Just ask the Tau and the fact they had to stop naming their hospital ships because they ran out of names.
40K was originally a jab at modernity, at least at modern tropes including thuggish cops, reality through the lens of propaganda, industrial life and alienation, imperialism generally and so on.
All of that is lost in an era today that critical thinking is gone with the learned capacity to hold contradictory ideas in the head for long enough to realize the absurdity of the contemporary situation.
So, sure 40K seems less grim-dark-ish, but this is mostly a result (imo) of the audience being able to appreciate the parody and of the content creators (writers and marketing directors, let's face facts here) to not only appreciate but to conceive of and to articulate such a vision.
Short answer, yes, it is and seems so because it as well as its target market is .... well, maybe too close to the realization that the dystopia is actually here and very real, so to be accepted, 40k has to put a heroic veneer ( to borrow a phrase used above in a preceding post) on things else maybe it is too close to home and not fantasy enough to attract kids away from the facts as they are on the ground.
I edited this post because I changed my mind after thinking through some of the other posts for a minute...
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
A bit. 40K took a weird turn in 3rd edition to parody-levels of Grimdark. They've lately been returning to more of the Rogue Trader and 2nd ed. roots in terms of feel. You also see this with the Rogue Trader kill team box and models, Genestealer Cults and stuff like Squats and Zoats returning to the modern game.
Compare the quotes in the 3rd ed. Dark Eldar book to their 8th ed. book for some examples of how they've changed from Saturday morning cartoon villain grimdark to something more a bit more subtle.
1) Some of the Grim Dark is in peoples minds more so than ever in the lore. Often people who tended to read less of the books and more just the codex and rulebooks. Building off the artwork and chatter with other fans they built a mental picture of a Grim Dark setting that was way darker than the Imperium as a whole.
2) GW is outreaching to new markets and side markets. Things like the books for kids and "chibi" models or even boardgames might, by some, be interpreted as dilution of the IP or even a shift in the IP away from Grimdark. In truth its simply GW taking the existing IP and applying it to other markets with suitable adjustments.
3) Not everyone actually reads the lore - in fact I'd argue the majority never open a Black Library book. So sometimes they see the happier/hopeful elements appearing here and there and they assume that things are changing. Whereas if they read more of the stories they'd realise that stories with hope and victory and good things ARE present in the lore and have been for a very long time. It's just something they either never identified with or even encountered.
4) The Imperium are the Good Guys - well kinda I mean they are the victorious good people who dominate the lore and books. So with material written by them for them of course they come off as the winners. That the Space Marines are defending an Empire of bloated madness where people toil in vast hive cities every day of their lives. Left with only scant time to eat, sleep and breed; with all the rest devoted to slave level labour with NO health and safety. Where peoples heads are sliced and diced to make servitors - brainddead machines to replace actual AI; where the rich might live for generations and go quite mad and insane; where whole planets can be lost within the administrative nightmare; where if you annoy the wrong guild member you can find your worlds cut off from the Imperium for generations.
Heck where the main mode of space travel is quite literally flying through hell.
Yeah its still very Grim Dark. Heck I'd argue that Grim Dark relies on hope and good things because its only by having them that they can be lost.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment"
You can't have darkness without first having light to lose. You can't have darkness without a beacon of light to slave and fight and die toward.
But for those of you who don’t see the grimdark being reduced how embedded are you in the lore. You’re on this forum so I’m gonna guess “somewhat”.
My observation is that GW are changing the facade on the high street to make it more action hero like and then leaving it to us to get more I got eh setting off we choose. Or that might be what I think now after reading the responses.
mrFickle wrote: But for those of you who don’t see the grimdark being reduced how embedded are you in the lore. You’re on this forum so I’m gonna guess “somewhat”.
Yeah, I like to do my best to stay up to date on current lore, especially beyond the kneejerk takes on it. Like, I can completely understand how, at first glance, certain things look odd, but they're not exactly hard things to educate on. And, as I say below, 40k has always (for me, at least) been outwardly "generic", and then the grimdark is just under the surface.
My observation is that GW are changing the facade on the high street to make it more action hero like and then leaving it to us to get more I got eh setting off we choose. Or that might be what I think now after reading the responses.
In my experience, it's always been like that - the heroic Space Marines, the might of good old humanity - and then with the slightest scrape of that veneer, it's back to grimdarkness. Been like that for years, they just happen to have a much larger media presence now, and some more varied toys.
I’d say it’s that very veneer that is core to the GrimDark.
To see humanity’s saviours as not even human, and of precious few scruples when it suits them? That’s grim and dark.
Space Wolves serve as a wonderful counter point to that, and I suspect that, as much as their aesthetic is important to their popularity. That the most ferocious and barbaric looking Astartes, who drink themselves drunk despite their superhuman biology, that wear fetishes, totems and pelts, are among the few to stand up for their brothers in arms, and tell The Inquisition ‘yeah, no you’re not’? Magnificent.
All Guilliman’s returns, and the dawn of the Primaris have brought is hope. And as others have said, hope is a truly dreadful thing. Hope can be snatched away. Hope can stay one’s hand. Hope can see a warrior abandon their post to survive one more minute, hour, day.
Take all that hope away? And people will fight to their absolute last. Because after hope is taken, all I’m left with is spite. And if that means a few more seconds pumping las round after las round into the oncoming enemy? That might just be the metaphorical butterfly wing that starts the tornado of victory.
So my Night Lord's terminators aren't grimdark? Damn, and I thought that a bunch of transhuman psychopaths in hulking, nigh impenetrable armor, suddenly teleporting into your face in order to tear you and your friends apart, skinning the survivors alive and turning their skin and various bits into cloaks and jewelry before nailing the sometimes still living remains to the wall as a reminder to everyone what happens when you feth with the sons of Curze was grimdark. My mistake.
And I painted so much blood for the blood god on their lightning claws and chainfists too.
I think they've just shifted the focus to lighter things for public perception. Appealing to the mass market is a different beast so they're shifting a little.
One of the simplest ways to do that is telling the story of 40k through characters more than they used to.
For people who play the game and play a faction, one they were encouraged to invent their own characters in, the setting is all they need. Named characters add flavour but they aren't narrative drivers.
However 40k is now larger than the tabletop and in other markets, characters are how casual consumers engage with material. This market is Invested through characters.
So what I think we are seeing is GW pulling on parts of 40k that are appropriate for the markets they are selling to.
While I prefer the setting centric nature of the table top, it's actually a pretty unusual way of engaging people with Fiction. Virtually all other forms of entertainment media are stories about people and the trials they go through in the context of the world they exist in.
And it follows that it's hard to sell characters that are contentious or 'bad' as protagonists.
So my Night Lord's terminators aren't grimdark? Damn, and I thought that a bunch of transhuman psychopaths in hulking, nigh impenetrable armor, suddenly teleporting into your face in order to tear you and your friends apart, skinning the survivors alive and turning their skin and various bits into cloaks and jewelry before nailing the sometimes still living remains to the wall as a reminder to everyone what happens when you feth with the sons of Curze was grimdark. My mistake.
And I painted so much blood for the blood god on their lightning claws and chainfists too.
Guess 40k is just getting soft.
They probably mean *loyalist* Terminators. Because look at those Carcharadons, such charming, lovely fellows! I mean Tyberos the Red Wake - that's just his favourite colour!
Can't have humans being slightly better than hopeless, I guess.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hellebore wrote: And it follows that it's hard to sell characters that are contentious or 'bad' as protagonists.
That's a fair point - it's far easier to go through a story following someone who is at least slightly good natured.
I mean, look at Gaunt's Ghosts - I'm not sure I'd call any of the protagonists in that bad. Even Gaunt, a literal Commissar, doesn't exactly rack up a massive tally of field executions (though he does make some, but we're usually on board with him when he does - he's a stark example of a morally "good" Commissar). So, with GG arguably being one of the most popular 40k series of fiction, and not exactly being always depressing and terrible (though it definitely has it's moments), the "good guys" do nearly always pull through. Still grimdark though, right?
GW products have been primarily marketed towards "kids"/young-mid teens since the early 90's so not sure what people are talking about when it comes to that.
The action figure stuff is clearly because nerds lap that nonsense up, no matter what their age.
The stories and art are a little more sanitised perhaps, at least I think that you have to go searching for the grimdark (stupid term) a bit more but it was always a silly (yet awesome) setting that included superheroes and supervillains.
Dai wrote: GW products have been primarily marketed towards "kids"/young-mid teens since the early 90's so not sure what people are talking about when it comes to that. .
Something like over 70% of us started in our teenage years (or younger). Whilst once you hit around 20 the number of people starting up drops off dramatically. Suffice it to say that the teenager market is clearly where GW manages to create a large body of its market who then grow up. They have far less chance of securing older people as fresh gamers. This also makes sense when you consider that GW is one of the major market leaders and entry points for the wargaming hobby. Chances are some of the other companies, esp those that have to trade only online, might actually see a reverse or slightly different pattern, with fewer younger, but more older people picking them up.
Dai wrote: GW products have been primarily marketed towards "kids"/young-mid teens since the early 90's so not sure what people are talking about when it comes to that. .
Something like over 70% of us started in our teenage years (or younger). Whilst once you hit around 20 the number of people starting up drops off dramatically. Suffice it to say that the teenager market is clearly where GW manages to create a large body of its market who then grow up. They have far less chance of securing older people as fresh gamers. This also makes sense when you consider that GW is one of the major market leaders and entry points for the wargaming hobby. Chances are some of the other companies, esp those that have to trade only online, might actually see a reverse or slightly different pattern, with fewer younger, but more older people picking them up.
You're likely correct, many people will start with GW as the gateway and then try other games at an older age as they fancy a change.
I don't know I guess I see this like adults complaining about Star Wars. Ultimately it's a young persons product and it's fine that we oldies still enjoy it but we should remember....it's for the kids. And trying to stop it being so would be inherently changing it from what made it good anyway. Not that I am saying kids can't like grimdark, they very much can, but at the same time I suspect GW has done their research.
Honestly I think GW strikes a very good level between teen and adult; their product is a very solid "Young Adult" franchise which has elements of younger and older market content all wrapped up inside.
It's not like, say, pokemon where the original fanbase has all grown up and remained fans, but the company has remained marketing at a preteen to young teen market
GW did indeed start making the setting more morally "clear", but only because imperials demand their precious uwu marines be depicted in a positive light. And sadly said imperial fans were hired as new blood by GW and BL...
Dai wrote: GW products have been primarily marketed towards "kids"/young-mid teens since the early 90's so not sure what people are talking about when it comes to that.
The action figure stuff is clearly because nerds lap that nonsense up, no matter what their age.
The stories and art are a little more sanitised perhaps, at least I think that you have to go searching for the grimdark (stupid term) a bit more but it was always a silly (yet awesome) setting that included superheroes and supervillains.
Interesting, so you think GW isn’t trying to “kiddify” it’s brand but is trying to exploit the kind of nerd that’s “gotta have them all”? I love sci fi but I don’t want the t-shirt or the collectables, but I have friends who just hoard the paraphernalia and go to comicon etc. I can see how the Bandai stuff would appeal to them. Expect they don’t play 40k.
I played 2ed as a teenager and have returned at 8ed so the landscape has changed a lot and there are conventions now and the dressing up people so the landscape has changed. So FairPlay to GW if they are tapping into that market, I just wish they sold a citadel range of deodorants (hint hint guys in my local GW). Leman Musk anyone?
So my Night Lord's terminators aren't grimdark? Damn, and I thought that a bunch of transhuman psychopaths in hulking, nigh impenetrable armor, suddenly teleporting into your face in order to tear you and your friends apart, skinning the survivors alive and turning their skin and various bits into cloaks and jewelry before nailing the sometimes still living remains to the wall as a reminder to everyone what happens when you feth with the sons of Curze was grimdark. My mistake.
And I painted so much blood for the blood god on their lightning claws and chainfists too.
Yes 40k has always been marketed towards young kids/boys.
It still is, but I think they just cant get away with the same sort of cover aesthetic and plaster some of the old art on their FB/Web Page. So everything has been made "clean" in the art style IMO.
Lore wise maybe not but the aesthetic style for sure and that creates the clean heroic veneer they can sell to parents. Who would take issues and launch virtual crusades if they suspected GW is trying to sell their kids bloodthirsty gory demons etc..
I dont know what their intention is, but either way it is getting less and less dark. As a kid the dystopian feel of the setting is one reason I fell in love with it, and its a let down knowing theyre doing the opposite in hopes of getting other kids to stay.
Even if they werent trying to make 40k less generic and "kid friendly" its definitley the direction they are going anyway
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The fundamental essence of the setting, the "humanity barely getting by, even after doing brutal and horrific things" is very much alive and well.
I think this is both true and false, because GW has a serious problem with telling versus showing.
We are told that the Imperium is in its most desperate hour, beset on all sides by numerous foes, and crippled by being split in two, with the Imperium Nihilus in the process of crumbling away.
We are shown new Primaris reinforcements coming to newly-awakened Guilliman's aid so that he can beat back the Imperium's foes, and major events/campaigns are either a win for the Imperium or at worst a draw. From a tabletop perspective there is nothing to suggest that the Imperium is any worse off. No units or technologies are more restricted as the means for their replenishment is lost in Nihilus. Imperial Guard aren't any worse off for the loss of Cadia. Cawl is pulling new inventions out from under his hat to make Space Marines more technologically advanced and lethal than ever. If you're an Imperium player things are pretty good.
I've also noticed more players seeing Space Marines and the Imperium as unironically good guys or at least justified in their actions, in large part because Space Marines are depicted less as fascist child-soldier enforcers of a genocidal ethno-state, and more ye knights of olde valiantly fighting evil monsters.
The grimdark is still there, buried in the reference materials and codices. But it certainly isn't at the forefront.
I've also noticed more players seeing Space Marines and the Imperium as unironically good guys or at least justified in their actions, in large part because Space Marines are depicted less as fascist child-soldier enforcers of a genocidal ethno-state, and more ye knights of olde valiantly fighting evil monsters..
Actually I'd argue that marines have ALWAYS looked like knights of olde valiantly fighting evil xenos monsters.
The whole "child soldier enforcers" is only developed and really seen through the lore and stories. Heck there's marines harvesting children from one of the Necromunda worlds in one of the new Inferno books - mostly by slaughtering everyone around them. So that part is VERY much still present.
It's just in the background books that most people don't read now and didn't read back then.
Marines and Imperials have always appeared "good" within the setting even way back in the 90s and before. They are protecting humanity and humans readily identify with humans thus protecting humans is "good". Considering that all the other races are out to kill humans that makes it pretty easy. The only way Marines could really be seen as evil would be if GW created an entirely new 100% human faction that wasn't Imperial nor Chaos and which had modern ideals and ethics and then pitted them against Marines. Without changing any lore the Imperium would fast seem "evil and dark".
Overread wrote: The only way Marines could really be seen as evil would be if GW created an entirely new 100% human faction that wasn't Imperial nor Chaos and which had modern ideals and ethics and then pitted them against Marines. Without changing any lore the Imperium would fast seem "evil and dark".
Aside from the 100% human requirement, that's pretty much exactly what the Tau were upon their introduction.
GW has since heavily walked that back by amping up the mind-control and darker themes for the Tau. Can't have it looking like the Imperium might not be the good guys, after all.
40K has always had noblebright elements. But they mainly serve to provide contrast and are not major forces.
They sometimes fall for the trap of setting up something nice simply to destroy it to show how bad the setting is, but its a tired trope and GW do not overuse it.
GW however are getting visibly darker.
The recent Sisters rerelease is grimdark BDSM now in plastic. The horror of the Imperium's Ecclesiarcy was never far from the surface, and nothing is new, but the new models reemphasise it with new different levels of penitent engine to choose from, complete with very detailed torture victim.
I remember a conversation with someone senior in GW who recalled GW corporates disapproval of the Dark Elves, now this was turn of century, pre Kirby etc. GW corporate saw this as a toy company in a new increasingly politically correct world and were horrified on reading about some of the factions. They wanted to tone down the Dark Elves in particular, studio dug their heels in. 'These are not nice people'. Yes they are models or sexist Nazis, but that is the point.
GW has never been into cheesecake, but goes a lot further than many games companies who are. I have to respect them for that. Infinity, Warmachine etc all use cheesecake, armour values for females are not corresponding to what they wear. Lots of skimpies running around in a bland asexual setting. Gw is the direct opposite, it delves deep into the torture porn but leaves it firmly in the background. Even when it is presented frontally such as with Witch Elves and Sisters Repentia its a subset of the whole and not highlighted in any way above the mainstream of the factions focus.
When you mix the horrors grimdark and both genders properly you will reach sexual exploitation sooner or later. Gw doesn't shy away from that, models it frontally but presents it as background. They know exactly what they are doing. The Sisters release went very far down the rabbit hole and few people noticed because it was wrapped up in grimdark and not cheesecake. I find that a perfect example of why grimdark is here to stay, they are so good at it you dont notice anymore.
If you think the game is getting less grimdark, your should try reading something in your codex other than the datasheets. I have the 8th ed codices for Necrons, GSC, and Sisters of Battle, all of which do an excellent job of painting the dire straights humanity is currently in.
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
How much better? Because now they're well beyond Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, etc. That's a problem. The core units of even elite xenos races are far below Intercessors. Chaos Space Marines as well and that's even more poignant. The historical parity has been thrown under the bus, and it's bad for the imagery.
The flavor of their eliteness has also changed into a frankly dumber version. What was once a focus on discipline (ATSKNF) has now become primarily (and much more simple-minded) "moar bigger." It's a degradation.
Ishagu wrote: It might appear to be less from dark if your knowledge of the lore is lacking.
Things are worse and more twisted than they've ever been.
Appearance is a big part of the product. Lore can still be dark, while the appearance is less so. It's a big thing for a product that is so reliant on imagery.
Aside from the "grim darkness" tagline, has it ever really been that grimdark? Sure, there have been dark elements in some of the lore from time to time, but it's always been chock full of absolute silliness as well, no?
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
How much better? Because now they're well beyond Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, etc. That's a problem. The core units of even elite xenos races are far below Intercessors. Chaos Space Marines as well and that's even more poignant. The historical parity has been thrown under the bus, and it's bad for the imagery.
The flavor of their eliteness has also changed into a frankly dumber version. What was once a focus on discipline (ATSKNF) has now become primarily (and much more simple-minded) "moar bigger." It's a degradation.
They're physically tougher and heave weapons that pack more of a punch an that's conveyed in their stats. Marines have balance issues atm but that's jsut due to the new books, fluffwise I think you need to brush up, ATSKNF was a reflection of their psycho-indoctrination, not their discipline. Their elite nature is they're given the imperiums best armour and weapons and then enhance the best of the best physically and mentally to be unstoppable killing machines.
Contrast that with an exarch who is a tall spindly xenos not much stronger than a human, wearing lightweight armour for mobility who excel because they practise with their combat style as a way of life. They're not winning arm wrestles with a space marines.
90's in pop culture where the edgy over the top years. Vampire the masquerade for intance was out in 91. Garbage pail kids in 89. I could find many other examples but I am lazy.
Are (were) 'nt the 2010 more appealed by dark but moral stories ? I mean it's the Super-heroes movies decade...
I feel like 90's were grimdark years when 10's are nobledark ones. GW writers are certainly not following a trend as much as they simply are the product of their environnement, like we are.
The only problem is that IMO nobledark doesn't fit the wh40k setting at all and makes it look plainly silly.
Contrast that with an exarch who is a tall spindly xenos not much stronger than a human, wearing lightweight armour for mobility who excel because they practise with their combat style as a way of life. They're not winning arm wrestles with a space marines.
If 40k was even remotely realistic, Eldar basic weapon would outrange anything in imperial arsenal save maybe lascanons. The skuricat is a handheld railgun. The energy it packs makes the bolter explosive shell a little firecracker.
Of course this has never had any bearing on game itself, where since 3rd ed it's just been a submachine gun bolter.
As for strenght, it shouldnt matter any way, both sides have some sort of powered suit (eldar just have a more advanced kind) and as such raw muscle power has zero impact on how much power the servos/artificial muscles can transfer. That's something a lot of people fail to grasp. A power armor doesn't work like "natural strenght+X". It can't add power to your hit, it replaces your power fully with however much the machine can exert. If you push it over it's limit, it will just break.
I've been disappointed by the newer Codexes and supplements over the last few years. There's been a shift away from the old style of books with plentiful amounts of grayscale artwork with more emphasis on theme and composition rather than detail. These days, reading the unit pages feels like browsing a product catalogue with the high res photos of each unit in colour schemes that don't resonate. The old photo gallery section which was fine as its own thing as has been cut down so much that its inclusion is basically pointless. Where there is art in the books, its hit or miss, and almost always where GW have hired a digital artist off the internet to draw something hyper-detailed and cleanly drawn that strictly resembles the associated products where older art show something more distinct and fascinating.
And that's where I feel the biggest hit to the "grimdark" atmosphere of the game has been. I still flick through my 4th and 5th edition IG Codexes to look at the art and read the written material, whereas I only open the newer ones if I need to check a rule.
Case in point, Its art like this that sticks with me when I close the book and put it away:
Mr.Omega wrote: These days, reading the unit pages feels like browsing a product catalogue with the high res photos of each unit in colour schemes that don't resonate.
Overread wrote: I think there's also a few other things going on
1) Some of the Grim Dark is in peoples minds more so than ever in the lore. Often people who tended to read less of the books and more just the codex and rulebooks. Building off the artwork and chatter with other fans they built a mental picture of a Grim Dark setting that was way darker than the Imperium as a whole.
2) GW is outreaching to new markets and side markets. Things like the books for kids and "chibi" models or even boardgames might, by some, be interpreted as dilution of the IP or even a shift in the IP away from Grimdark. In truth its simply GW taking the existing IP and applying it to other markets with suitable adjustments.
3) Not everyone actually reads the lore - in fact I'd argue the majority never open a Black Library book. So sometimes they see the happier/hopeful elements appearing here and there and they assume that things are changing. Whereas if they read more of the stories they'd realise that stories with hope and victory and good things ARE present in the lore and have been for a very long time. It's just something they either never identified with or even encountered.
4) The Imperium are the Good Guys - well kinda I mean they are the victorious good people who dominate the lore and books. So with material written by them for them of course they come off as the winners. That the Space Marines are defending an Empire of bloated madness where people toil in vast hive cities every day of their lives. Left with only scant time to eat, sleep and breed; with all the rest devoted to slave level labour with NO health and safety. Where peoples heads are sliced and diced to make servitors - brainddead machines to replace actual AI; where the rich might live for generations and go quite mad and insane; where whole planets can be lost within the administrative nightmare; where if you annoy the wrong guild member you can find your worlds cut off from the Imperium for generations.
Heck where the main mode of space travel is quite literally flying through hell.
Yeah its still very Grim Dark. Heck I'd argue that Grim Dark relies on hope and good things because its only by having them that they can be lost.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment"
You can't have darkness without first having light to lose. You can't have darkness without a beacon of light to slave and fight and die toward.
This is the answer to this threads question. Simple as.
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
How much better? Because now they're well beyond Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, etc. That's a problem. The core units of even elite xenos races are far below Intercessors. Chaos Space Marines as well and that's even more poignant. The historical parity has been thrown under the bus, and it's bad for the imagery.
The flavor of their eliteness has also changed into a frankly dumber version. What was once a focus on discipline (ATSKNF) has now become primarily (and much more simple-minded) "moar bigger." It's a degradation.
Well don't forget Necron Warriors were actually degraded themselves with the release of Ward's codex. Also Elites could always be below another army's troop choice. Forget that Grey Knights used to be 25 points a pop?
Necrons are interesting to me because one thing people keep asking for is "change" in the setting. Yet as GW has changed the necrons through their timeline - from almost mindless terminators, to steadily awakening lords with minds and personalities; the change has had some pushback.
It's an interesting display of how we get attached to a singular view of "our" factions and whilst we might desire change; at the same time we don't really want change.
Overread wrote: Necrons are interesting to me because one thing people keep asking for is "change" in the setting. Yet as GW has changed the necrons through their timeline - from almost mindless terminators, to steadily awakening lords with minds and personalities; the change has had some pushback.
It's an interesting display of how we get attached to a singular view of "our" factions and whilst we might desire change; at the same time we don't really want change.
Progressive change to a setting does not have to line up with a character change. The change to necrons come with both good and bad, I think for the setting it was probably a good change on the whole.
But for a character change, it’s mostly turn them into villain charecter profile 3. You could probably turn them into humans and there character would stay largely the same at times.
Could also be some of the modern writing is just soo bad, which is hard to divest from the change at times.
Grim dark I think for most of my time with 40k has come up as an excuse for something dumb, rather than as truly a theme or setting it follow. I was not there at the start, but even starting at the end of 2nd I have never really felt it’s any darker than other things I have read or read today.
Slayer-Fan123 785726 10724508 wrote:
Well don't forget Necron Warriors were actually degraded themselves with the release of Ward's codex. Also Elites could always be below another army's troop choice. Forget that Grey Knights used to be 25 points a pop?
That is hard to forget considering their cost in the codex.
Post-coming of M42, things are not looking good at all, the galaxy is being currently framed on the brink of destruction, especially since we just came off the heels of the 13th black crusade, and the formation of the great rift.
Having played for two decades (not as long as some, I admit) I do feel like it's stayed relatively consistent but they have smoothed out some of the grim darker edges in my opinion. It's nothing dramatic but you notice some of the elements being toned down from time to time.
For me, case and point are the daemon models and Plague Zombies. If you look specifically at the Horrors and compare the current crop to Juan Diaz's there's certainty an element of horror lost. The newer ones look like cartoon puppets whilst Diaz's look like literal horrors as you see razor toothed blobs with thin, ape-like arms tearing their way out of one another.
Similarly with the poxwalkers vs plague zombies (I am NOT commenting on the name, but the actual model) and how they went from literal shambling disease ridden human corpses, stripped to the bone or decaying with a creepy glow emanating from empty eye sockets to smiling/campy grotesques that barely resemble a human; there's once again an element of horror lost in my opinion.
Finally is the daemon prince model. The current one is awful, it literally looks like a campy saturday morning cartoon villain. I've seen similar effects (the new Bloodthirster and Great Unclean Ones lack an implicit danger/'realism' the LOC, KOS and forge world GUO seem to harbour). I know I mention horror but these specific examples are areas where the horror of these entities added to the 'grim dark' tone of 40k.
Then there's the odd examples in fluff too - flayed ones are a decent example. How they went from insane psychopaths, driven mad by the transference to new metals forms so they tear the skin off victims in a macabre attempt of 'feeling' biological again.
But I don't know if my former complaints are just examples of some bad sculpts and the latter just a slight shift.
Gadzilla666 785726 10723600 wrote:
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
I don't know what a gorgoroth is.
A heavy metal band who recorded a concert in Poland for a live DVD only to be arrested and have all the footage seized because it was considered by the authorities to be offensive to religion. That wouldn't happen in America.
Ah stuff like that, yeah you get for prison for offending religion here. But you have the exact same thing, just not for catholics.
Uh, no. in my area there is a group of "Satanists" (I put quotes because they are not actually, they just legally register themselves as such for political purposes) and they go around putting up huge statues of satan and holding satanic prayers to stop the government from putting christian symbols in spaces owned by the government.
Legally if the government does allow, say, a christian group to put up a statue of jesus or hold a public prayer, they have to allow any religious organization to participate as well. so the "Satanists" come and ask "Hey, do you want to have a statue of jesus and a statue of Satan, or would you rather have no statues at all?"
I can't really think of anything that could be more offensive to religion than that, and that is pretty much 100% allowed here.
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
How much better? Because now they're well beyond Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, etc. That's a problem. The core units of even elite xenos races are far below Intercessors. Chaos Space Marines as well and that's even more poignant. The historical parity has been thrown under the bus, and it's bad for the imagery.
The flavor of their eliteness has also changed into a frankly dumber version. What was once a focus on discipline (ATSKNF) has now become primarily (and much more simple-minded) "moar bigger." It's a degradation.
They're physically tougher and heave weapons that pack more of a punch an that's conveyed in their stats. Marines have balance issues atm but that's jsut due to the new books, fluffwise I think you need to brush up, ATSKNF was a reflection of their psycho-indoctrination, not their discipline. Their elite nature is they're given the imperiums best armour and weapons and then enhance the best of the best physically and mentally to be unstoppable killing machines.
Contrast that with an exarch who is a tall spindly xenos not much stronger than a human, wearing lightweight armour for mobility who excel because they practise with their combat style as a way of life. They're not winning arm wrestles with a space marines.
A game piece that is an elite infantryman with a rifle that shoots essentially the width of the entire board versus a melee-only specialist whose job is to kill elite infantry....who should win in melee?
Obviously the guy with the 30" range gun, right? It makes the most sense for him to win in melee?
Ok, how about this: That same elite infantry, who can fistfight and win against specialized melee units, in a shooting fight with another factions' infantry who dies instantly in melee. Who should win at a 30" range shooting duel?
Obviously that first guy right? He should be able to win at shooting vs the shooting-only specialist. It just makes sense.
nah. Marines being "Decent at everything, but worse than other races' specialists at what they're specialized in" is what gave the game some semblance of balance. Marines being cartoonishly superior to everyone at everything, including versus other races specialized units that do only one thing is what leads groups to just...stop playing versus marines.
I can't really think of anything that could be more offensive to religion than that, and that is pretty much 100% allowed here.
You should know that the law, in theory, protects ALL religious fee-fees. So yes, the Satanists could in theory sue every single christian artwork outside of place of worship. It's not going to happen because the whole damn country has been hijacked by jesus fondlers, but in theory it works for all religions, as it doesn't protect religion per se,it protects religious feelings of individuals. Still dumb, mind you.
I can't really think of anything that could be more offensive to religion than that, and that is pretty much 100% allowed here.
You should know that the law, in theory, protects ALL religious fee-fees. So yes, the Satanists could in theory sue every single christian artwork outside of place of worship. It's not going to happen because the whole damn country has been hijacked by jesus fondlers, but in theory it works for all religions, as it doesn't protect religion per se,it protects religious feelings of individuals. Still dumb, mind you.
maybe in the US, in our country when a satanist offended the catholic church, he had to get a go fund me to pay up. If he wasn't a know celebrity he would end in jail time too. One has to be a state recognised religion here to be protected by law, cults, sects or satanists can never be registered and never count as religion. While their followers are publicly rediculed, save for cities like warsaw.
Yes, GW is trying to lose the Grim Dark. It's not very kid friendly. GW made that partnership with Barnes and Noble. Had to do a double take when I saw "Blitz Bowl" which is a renamed Blood Bowl, and "Combat Arena" instead of Kill Team.
There is a definite gap between GW marketing and the 40K lore. The marketing team is doing its damnest to pass the models off as “your heroes”, but the lore contains all sorts of allusions to grim darkness that gets passed over by most of the customer base.
The marketing aspect has been bleeding into the artwork for some time now, and the imagery has lost a lot of the “war journalist” look and become more modeling propaganda to sell the settings and models.
It’s all kind of funny to me - I use to abhor some of the grim undertones of the setting, and the Tau’s initial nobleness and appearance as perhaps 40K’s only good guys is what initially drew me to the faction. That’s changed over time - both the Tau naivety and my regard for 40K’s grim background, and it seems the company has reversed things - the Tau seem darker and the grinding bureaucratic nightmare of the imperium feels far more noble bright than it ever has.
catbarf wrote: Can't have it looking like the Imperium might not be the good guys, after all.
catbarf wrote:We are told that the Imperium is in its most desperate hour, beset on all sides by numerous foes, and crippled by being split in two, with the Imperium Nihilus in the process of crumbling away.
We are shown new Primaris reinforcements coming to newly-awakened Guilliman's aid so that he can beat back the Imperium's foes, and major events/campaigns are either a win for the Imperium or at worst a draw. From a tabletop perspective there is nothing to suggest that the Imperium is any worse off. No units or technologies are more restricted as the means for their replenishment is lost in Nihilus. Imperial Guard aren't any worse off for the loss of Cadia. Cawl is pulling new inventions out from under his hat to make Space Marines more technologically advanced and lethal than ever. If you're an Imperium player things are pretty good.
IMHO the best part of the 40k setting has always been that the "good guys" run an empire that is incomprehensibly horrific compared to any of history's cruelest and bloodiest regimes, and yet they are still some how the least worst bunch in the galaxy (from a human's point of view anyway). For me, the grim darkness of the Imperium has always been about the state of the Imperium itself rather than its status as an empire perennially on the brink of collapse. Though it would be refreshing for them to actually properly win or lose some conflicts, the whole concept of the Imperium Nihilus should give ground for something other than seemingly constant Pyrrhic victories.
Semper wrote:But I don't know if my former complaints are just examples of some bad sculpts and the latter just a slight shift.
In the case of Chaos Daemon it's a bit of both -- the early plastic kits really suffer from technical limitations (they couldn't put as much detail in the kits) and design choices (aesthetic nods to the older, somewhat goofier metal sculpts rather than translating the much admired Diaz sculpts to plastic). The poses of many of the miniatures in the Bloodletter and Pink Horror kits are also quite bad imho, I'd be all over the Horrors if they looked closer to their smaller blue selves.
Yeah, curse those Space Marine Captains and Company Commanders with their 3 Wounds.
2W would only be an issue if there weren't a system which was capable of stripping of multiple wounds at once.
Things look a lot less desperate when your baseline troop is miles better than their xenos counterparts. But nice try.
Marines *should* be better than xenos counterparts. However, the tabletop isn't a good reflection of what the lore is - realistically, you'd have one squad of Intercessors/Tacticals, and the rest of the army is guardsmen as far as the eye can see.
If the Imperium was a single army book, Space Marines would be an Elites choice comparatively.
How much better? Because now they're well beyond Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, etc. That's a problem. The core units of even elite xenos races are far below Intercessors. Chaos Space Marines as well and that's even more poignant. The historical parity has been thrown under the bus, and it's bad for the imagery.
The flavor of their eliteness has also changed into a frankly dumber version. What was once a focus on discipline (ATSKNF) has now become primarily (and much more simple-minded) "moar bigger." It's a degradation.
They're physically tougher and heave weapons that pack more of a punch an that's conveyed in their stats. Marines have balance issues atm but that's jsut due to the new books, fluffwise I think you need to brush up, ATSKNF was a reflection of their psycho-indoctrination, not their discipline. Their elite nature is they're given the imperiums best armour and weapons and then enhance the best of the best physically and mentally to be unstoppable killing machines.
Contrast that with an exarch who is a tall spindly xenos not much stronger than a human, wearing lightweight armour for mobility who excel because they practise with their combat style as a way of life. They're not winning arm wrestles with a space marines.
Not running away in the face of a dire situation takes discipline, regardless of where it comes from. Bravery, indoctrination, loyalty to brothers-in-arms, whatever. Worthwhile to note that ATSKNF was different and often a superior rule to plain "Fearless" through the editions, too. So not just mindless bravery, but calculated bravery. That's discipline.
As for Aspect Warriors, they have tended to be roughly on-par with Space Marines (with the exception of Warp Spiders and Dark Reapers whose wargear sets them far ahead). Dire Avengers and Striking Scorpions have always been rough equivalents to marines with a little give or take. Intercessors blow them out of the water, and it's bad.
Well don't forget Necron Warriors were actually degraded themselves with the release of Ward's codex. Also Elites could always be below another army's troop choice. Forget that Grey Knights used to be 25 points a pop?
Yes, and the degradation of Necron Warriors was a bad move.
I'm not talking about FOC "Elites", I'm talking about supposed-to-be-elite-warriors regardless of FOC. Aspect Warriors and Necron Warriors imo should be considered "elite" infantry. Certainly CSM should.
Mr.Omega wrote: Where there is art in the books, its hit or miss, and almost always where GW have hired a digital artist off the internet to draw something hyper-detailed and cleanly drawn that strictly resembles the associated products where older art show something more distinct and fascinating.
Couldn't agree more.
To me the most standout example is in the Death Guard book, simply due to the juxtaposition of it. On one page you have the PBC artwork, with the blander than bland artwork, which is just literally copy and paste the Dark Imperium minis, it's so bad there are a pair of Plague Marine twins on the right of the pic (I also just noticed when getting my DG book out for this the PBC has the seam on its hull for how the mini goes together... ), it's just an uninspired copy and paste.
However, on the following page we have one of my favourite newer pieces of 40kk art. It's a menagerie of madness of what a Nurgle daemon invasion would look like. It grabs the feel and insanity of what a Nurgle tallyband is without resorting to just copy and pasting the actual models. There are things going on in the background which do not (necessarily) have represented minis like the giant bell warshrine, which can easily spark the imagination to kitbash one from a Screaming Bell (which is what artwork should do IMO. 'Member this CSM pic and the amount of Defiler conversions it spawned before the actual mini came out?). The Nurglings, the worm things and whatever that is behind them all go together to make an inspiring piece of art.
The Tau you don't "see" it, its a subtle mind washing; chemical, social pressure that makes you want to conform.
Every sentient species uses social pressure. It's how we don't poop on the floor. But hey, keep trying to equalize the genocidal regime which kills more of it's citizens than it's enemies to a mildly authoritarian oligarchy.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Strg Alt wrote: It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
So 1990 then?
Seriously, check out Realm of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned. Nurglings are smirking, mischievous, cartoonish things even then. The 'grimdark all the time' thing is mostly a 3e invention. They've toned it down a bit since then but it's still IMO darker than it was in Rogue Trader and (in particular) 2e.
IronSlug wrote: 90's in pop culture where the edgy over the top years. Vampire the masquerade for intance was out in 91. Garbage pail kids in 89. I could find many other examples but I am lazy.
Are (were) 'nt the 2010 more appealed by dark but moral stories ? I mean it's the Super-heroes movies decade...
I feel like 90's were grimdark years when 10's are nobledark ones. GW writers are certainly not following a trend as much as they simply are the product of their environnement, like we are.
The only problem is that IMO nobledark doesn't fit the wh40k setting at all and makes it look plainly silly.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Short answer, yes. Longer answer, it doesn't appeal to happier people
What are you talking about, happy people are the target audience for comedy.
I measure myself to be merely "content" and as long as my faction (Tau) makes sense, the others can be as grimderp as they wanna be as long as I don't have to read their codices. Periods in my life where I want to giggle more than usual I'll break out my Dark Eldar, IG or Tyranids. (Or if I REALLY need it, Spess Muhreens)
Strg Alt wrote: It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
So 1990 then?
Seriously, check out Realm of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned. Nurglings are smirking, mischievous, cartoonish things even then. The 'grimdark all the time' thing is mostly a 3e invention. They've toned it down a bit since then but it's still IMO darker than it was in Rogue Trader and (in particular) 2e.
Yup. Not getting this at all. The jolly rictus grin has been a feature of Nurgle minis and art since day 1. There’s a grinning GUO on the cover of LATD....
GW's style is very bold and bright colours and a fairly simplistic cartoon approach, which makes things look less vile. However if you go with darker tones, more fleshy puss oozing colours and perhaps mix in some matt and gloss varnish to make the exposed juices look more fluid etc... then the whole appearance of the models changes dramatically.
Overread wrote: I think painting style is a big thing for Nurgle.
GW's style is very bold and bright colours and a fairly simplistic cartoon approach, which makes things look less vile. However if you go with darker tones, more fleshy puss oozing colours and perhaps mix in some matt and gloss varnish to make the exposed juices look more fluid etc... then the whole appearance of the models changes dramatically.
Yup. I despise GW’s pastel toned Nurgle scheme with a passion. Mine are a sort of brown/green sludge colour with plenty of fluids dripping out of them.
Irks me whenever I see someone else’s Nurgle minis and they haven’t at least put some gloss on things like exposed guts etc. Guys, that stuff will be wet, like really wet.
Strg Alt wrote: It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
So 1990 then?
Seriously, check out Realm of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned. Nurglings are smirking, mischievous, cartoonish things even then. The 'grimdark all the time' thing is mostly a 3e invention. They've toned it down a bit since then but it's still IMO darker than it was in Rogue Trader and (in particular) 2e.
Indeed. Been reading my reprint copy the past few weeks (now available exclusively at Warhammer World, or through the loot group if you join the waiting list).
Nurgle has always been portrayed as a jovial, caring (if completely insane) deity. Nurglings have always been 'cutsey' burbling little balls of filth. Beasts of Nurgle have always been gloopy, slobbery and puppy like in their affection.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Thats bizare - Nurglings have always been like that from day one. Cute, smelly fat diseased imps. I have plenty of the old metal Nurglings as well.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Thats bizare - Nurglings have always been like that from day one. Cute, smelly fat diseased imps. I have plenty of the old metal Nurglings as well.
Are you trying to troll me? The metal nurglings aren't comparable in any way to the plastic trash we got today. And no, the nurglings which I am talking about are not from 1990. They were introduced around 3rd.
The only smiling dude was the Great Unclean One which is fine with me. But nowadays we have cartoonish nurglings too and the abyssmal guy who rides on a slug. He looks as stupid as the Necron who thinks he is Michael "Air" Jordan. Who should take these morons seriously? Short answer: No one. That's why Grimdark is dead and the Age of Cringe finally arrived into 40K.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Thats bizare - Nurglings have always been like that from day one. Cute, smelly fat diseased imps. I have plenty of the old metal Nurglings as well.
Are you trying to troll me? The metal nurglings aren't comparable in any way to the plastic trash we got today. And no, the nurglings which I am talking about are not from 1990. They were introduced around 3rd.
The only smiling dude was the Great Unclean One which is fine with me. But nowadays we have cartoonish nurglings too and the abyssmal guy who rides on a slug. He looks as stupid as the Necron who thinks he is Michael "Air" Jordan. Who should take these morons seriously? Short answer: No one. That's why Grimdark is dead and the Age of Cringe finally arrived into 40K.
Literally wrong. Go on SoLegends. Look at the Nurglings (MDG has even provided the page ITT). Note how jolly they look, one is even tittering for himself. I’ve had this out with you before but you won’t have it so kindly jog on with this incorrect rhetoric.
Also I think we have mainly agreement that the 40k setting is STILL grimdark, but I was really asking is are we seeing an attempt, in action, to slowly move away from that or create a nicer shop window and leave the grim dark for the next level of player.
2 really interesting points I’ve seen one here (and I am paraphrasing):
1. The collectible action figure stuff I mentioned actually had been created for a certain type of adult customer, the collector geek.
2. Grimdark is a product of generation X and we don’t live in that world anymore. We live an a world of Facebook, and instagram where everything looks totes amazeballs. So although grimdark is in the lore GW is really just following modern consumer trends.
Also I think we have mainly agreement that the 40k setting is STILL grimdark, but I was really asking is are we seeing an attempt, in action, to slowly move away from that or create a nicer shop window and leave the grim dark for the next level of player.
2 really interesting points I’ve seen one here (and I am paraphrasing):
1. The collectible action figure stuff I mentioned actually had been created for a certain type of adult customer, the collector geek.
2. Grimdark is a product of generation X and we don’t live in that world anymore. We live an a world of Facebook, and instagram where everything looks totes amazeballs. So although grimdark is in the lore GW is really just following modern consumer trends.
'Edgelord' is derogatory term for a certain stereotype of [player] that overplays a certain "edgy" element or idea; often seen as detriment to the enjoyment of others.
I disagree with observation #2. Partly because Facebook is about the most Grimdark thing I can think of, but also because I think it's just a maturing of what's there. As other's have said, there's nothing nice about Penitent Engines(or... anything not shiny Marine(who still have their own grimdark))
An “edgelord” is a term for someone who tries too hard to be “edgy”- “Look at me, I’m suicidal, I’m depressed, life is awful-“, when really they’re none of those things. They’re mostly about 12, and hang around on r/teenagers.
mrFickle wrote:Also I think we have mainly agreement that the 40k setting is STILL grimdark, but I was really asking is are we seeing an attempt, in action, to slowly move away from that or create a nicer shop window and leave the grim dark for the next level of player.
Well, in my experience, shop window 40k has ALWAYS been "here's a noble Space Marine cardboard cut out, and here's the latest big event that you can join in", not "did I tell you that the humans in this setting are xenophobic fascists"?
I don't think GW are making an effort to move away from anything, I think they're leaning more into the "you like this setting, here's all the stuff you get in it!", as you later say, the 'collector'.
1. The collectible action figure stuff I mentioned actually had been created for a certain type of adult customer, the collector geek.
Yeah, this one's easy enough. Themed items of all kinds are both solid income, and good portions of the fanbase like trinkets and custom designed clothes and whatever. So not even just alongside the chibis and funko pops, you've got themed leggings (need to pick up some of my own!), hoodies, dice, mugs, etc. It's just expanding what can be related to the world of 40k.
2. Grimdark is a product of generation X and we don’t live in that world anymore. We live an a world of Facebook, and instagram where everything looks totes amazeballs. So although grimdark is in the lore GW is really just following modern consumer trends.
Still don't really agree with that. If anything, modern society is increasingly nihilistic, divided, and aggressive. Modern consumer trends are brand recognition and nostalgia, over many other things. Nostalgia is especially formidable for GW, because many people who started a lot younger, back before the new millennium, are now coming back to the hobby with disposable income - and so revitalising old model lines and games (like Titanicus, Aeronautica, Necromunda, etc) is a good way to hook them in.
I'd agree that in terms of shop front and website, GW has never really pushed the GrimDark.
Sure, when I started out, most GW stores I'd visit (Edinburgh, Maidstone, Torquay) would be playing Heavy Metal, often Thrash.
But the signage wasn't Metal. The displays weren't Metal. Indeed the only warning that I can think of was on the Realm of Chaos books, with the 'suggested for mature readers' sticker
See, it was a thing! Also absent on the reprints (so a cunning way to tell if someone is trying to rip you off. The Doc Knows All*!)
Those books were and indeed are, notably gnarly. The artwork is definitely not what most kids are used to - but I wouldn't say it's therefore not Kid Friendly. There's no, well, rude bits. You know the ones. The ones that get ruder and ruder as we grow And being largely (entirely?) pencil or black and white, little gore to be seen in a manner that might cause automatic Pearl Clutching.
But, that's about it. 40k has never really been pushed on it's rather unsubtle subtext. Beyond 'everyone is fighting, all the time, the gods are laughing, you will not be missed', it's left to the Hobbyist to delve in, and find the horror.
*Actually level of knowing all severely overstated. No refunds.
So the nurglings, going through the old ones and its somewhat striking how different they are to the ones we have now in terms of "grim dark" the modern ones are indeed derpy, playful little pixies or faeries, that kind of mischief surrounds them.
The old ones though, they seem to have the feel of demonic little anarchistic evil zombie babies, they look like they are in pain and want to spread it.
while both still have that somewhat jovial look and theme in places (more so with the new ones) the old ones just have an altogether different feel, I know that is subjective and I am not saying one is better than the other but the difference is absolutely noticeable.
either way its nice to see the progression over time and makes me happy I still have some nurglings from every era
Nurglings are, well, not [quite] malevolent. They're definitely playful, and enjoy a good laugh. And they've always been described as overwhelming enemies in a squealing, biting, scratching tide - and the diseases they carry proving far more fatal than the attack itself.
That's....never changed. I for one consider something ostensibly kinda cute actually being a surprisingly vicious killer far creepier than 'oh noes, must be evil because evil face'.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think people need to better consider what is meant by Grimdark.
40k remains a highly oppressive and hostile setting. The vast, vast majority of humanity will never know the peace many of us on here enjoy.
By that, I mean things like holidays, weekends, full bellies, a comfortable bed, trips to the pub etc.
Instead, the vast majority face short, miserable lives of near endless toil. Poor food, little if any sunlight, pollutants everywhere, zero health and safety.
Recruits to the Astra Militarum are outright lied to. Because all they are is disposable. Just another ammo pack in the colossal warmachine that is The Imperium.
Truth and freedom of expression are utterly suppressed. With our god like view of things, we can argue it's for good reason (the less you know, the less likely you are to try to learn more). But it's now become By Rote, so nobody really knows anything about anything. It's Just The Way Things Are.
The despair comes from the total lack of respite. The Primaris, shiny and new, are simply the latest gasp of air above the water of a drowning man. The slightest extension before the inevitable.
Nothing is ever going to improve. Mankind's enemies are too many. It's Empire too big. It's logistics too mind boggling. There is no enlightment amongst the stars. Mankind is simply too stubborn to accept the inevitable. And so they fight on and on and on and on.
The same is true of the Eldar. Whichever stripe, they're a doomed race. They've plunged from grace, and will never return. They lack the numbers, and even with Commorite tech, they'll never have the numbers to reclaim what was lost.
Necrons? They've lost everything already. Are any of them even sane? Any at all? Even The Silent King? Who knows. All they are are Kings of Ashes. Their empire turned to dust, their subjects mindless automata.
Orks? Yeah, OK, Orks are definitely and definitively happy. Always have been, always will be. Up The Orks!
Chaos? Oh you poor, poor fools. Yes you are arguably right to fight against the ever present oppression of The Imperium. Shame about the intent of those you sided with. Like any peasants caught up in any revolution? You're not coming out of this well. At all. That includes Chaos Space Marines.
Tau? Sweet Summer Children With Ribbons In Their Hair. They genuinely believe they've killed Slaanesh. As a race, they're utterly naive. Only time will tell if they can survive long enough to learn those harsh lessons. And how well will The Greater Good as it currently stands hold up once The Inevitable Maths occurs.
Tyranids? They're just hunger incarnate. Unfeeling, uncaring. Existing only on their mad crusade to breed in ever larger numbers.
40k is, was and always will be a living hell. There are NO good guys. There are NO bad guys. Just fools, idiots, and every single one of them damned.
3rd ed codex, a tau force killed a slaaneshi champion, and assumed that slaanesh was the warband leaders' name. So no, they don't think they killed a god.
Cronch wrote: 3rd ed codex, a tau force killed a slaaneshi champion, and assumed that slaanesh was the warband leaders' name. So no, they don't think they killed a god.
Isn't it more that they don't believe that the Chaos and Imperium forces at as vast and powerful and godlike as they are. So killing a Slaanesh Champion to them is killing this great evil Slaanesh that they've heard all these stories about and they assume hte Greater Demon is this great evil monsters.
I think the more modern lore is that Tau are starting to realise that they really are a tiny cog against some vast war machines. Heck the Tau only survived because the Imperium forgot about them several thousand years ago. It's hard to have high aspirations of yourself when you have to accept that the only reason you were allowed to evolve is because of an admin error on the part of the local super-power. It's right up there with the Earth being destroyed to make way for a new intergalactic hyperspace highway route.
But it still serves to show how utterly naive they are a species. They've literally no idea what's out there, waiting for them.
How long do you think they'd last against Leviathan, on the scale Macragge suffered?
How long do you think they'll last once Gue'la start worshipping Chaos? I mean, they allow pretty much any worship. Will they figure it out before a warp rift is opened and a planet falls to Daemons? They've only got brute force to rely on. No hexagrammic, no faith miracles etc. Just shoot, shoot and shoot some more.
Cronch wrote: 3rd ed codex, a tau force killed a slaaneshi champion, and assumed that slaanesh was the warband leaders' name. So no, they don't think they killed a god.
Isn't it more that they don't believe that the Chaos and Imperium forces at as vast and powerful and godlike as they are. So killing a Slaanesh Champion to them is killing this great evil Slaanesh that they've heard all these stories about and they assume hte Greater Demon is this great evil monsters.
I think the more modern lore is that Tau are starting to realise that they really are a tiny cog against some vast war machines. Heck the Tau only survived because the Imperium forgot about them several thousand years ago. It's hard to have high aspirations of yourself when you have to accept that the only reason you were allowed to evolve is because of an admin error on the part of the local super-power. It's right up there with the Earth being destroyed to make way for a new intergalactic hyperspace highway route.
They survived because they got caught in a Warp Storm and got lucky the Imperium was distracted by (another) civil war. So I'd say they survived because another race saw them and thought "hey look a useful pawn".
Cronch wrote: 3rd ed codex, a tau force killed a slaaneshi champion, and assumed that slaanesh was the warband leaders' name. So no, they don't think they killed a god.
Isn't it more that they don't believe that the Chaos and Imperium forces at as vast and powerful and godlike as they are. So killing a Slaanesh Champion to them is killing this great evil Slaanesh that they've heard all these stories about and they assume hte Greater Demon is this great evil monsters.
I think the more modern lore is that Tau are starting to realise that they really are a tiny cog against some vast war machines. Heck the Tau only survived because the Imperium forgot about them several thousand years ago. It's hard to have high aspirations of yourself when you have to accept that the only reason you were allowed to evolve is because of an admin error on the part of the local super-power. It's right up there with the Earth being destroyed to make way for a new intergalactic hyperspace highway route.
They survived because they got caught in a Warp Storm and got lucky the Imperium was distracted by (another) civil war. So I'd say they survived because another race saw them and thought "hey look a useful pawn".
Isn't there still a lot of talk that the Eldar had a hand in it?
Tau have also gone through a design change too - I can well see GW splitting them like they did with Tyranids and Genestealer cults. Having Tau Imperium with the mecha focused Tau and then Tau Auxillery force which is all the Kroot and Vespid and allied forces. I'm still somewhat sad that Tau didn't become the "catch all" army with loads of different small faction xenos. Not that I dislike their mecha focus - which I think is equally great.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:The Primaris, shiny and new, are simply the latest gasp of air above the water of a drowning man. The slightest extension before the inevitable.
Exactly what I've been saying about Primaris. They're another log thrown on a dying fire, another twist of the knife. It's not this big "humanity's safe, we're all fine now because PROGRESS!" hurrah, it's a "this is the only thing that stopped us getting even more battered by half the galaxy being lost behind a veil of madness".
As for the rest of the post, exalted. Perfectly sums up my thoughts on "is 40k still grimdark".
Cronch wrote: 3rd ed codex, a tau force killed a slaaneshi champion, and assumed that slaanesh was the warband leaders' name. So no, they don't think they killed a god.
Isn't it more that they don't believe that the Chaos and Imperium forces at as vast and powerful and godlike as they are. So killing a Slaanesh Champion to them is killing this great evil Slaanesh that they've heard all these stories about and they assume hte Greater Demon is this great evil monsters.
I think the more modern lore is that Tau are starting to realise that they really are a tiny cog against some vast war machines. Heck the Tau only survived because the Imperium forgot about them several thousand years ago. It's hard to have high aspirations of yourself when you have to accept that the only reason you were allowed to evolve is because of an admin error on the part of the local super-power. It's right up there with the Earth being destroyed to make way for a new intergalactic hyperspace highway route.
They survived because they got caught in a Warp Storm and got lucky the Imperium was distracted by (another) civil war. So I'd say they survived because another race saw them and thought "hey look a useful pawn".
Isn't there still a lot of talk that the Eldar had a hand in it?
Tau have also gone through a design change too - I can well see GW splitting them like they did with Tyranids and Genestealer cults. Having Tau Imperium with the mecha focused Tau and then Tau Auxillery force which is all the Kroot and Vespid and allied forces. I'm still somewhat sad that Tau didn't become the "catch all" army with loads of different small faction xenos. Not that I dislike their mecha focus - which I think is equally great.
There's no solid lore that says the Eldar did it but considering that they were saved from extinction in the stone age by a Warp Storm (that Eldar can summon) and later became such a rapidly advancing empire because of the Ethereals (who literally appeared from nowhere with flashing lights) then it's pretty likely that someone interfered with it and that's 80% of what Eldar do.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I think so, and it's not happening whole sale it's happening slowly. However you can't ignore the much more kiddy nature of recent things, little chibi marines, action figures, etc, etc. You could say its just marketing and part of it is but it also seems a direct press in a certain direction.
I strongly, strongly suspect these are done as ways to gain traction in the Japanese, and then Pan-Asian market. The pockets of Japanese who have serious hobbies can run very deep, China is full of new-money and spoiled children, and Korea is maybe something between the two? (IDK much about Korea).
Taiwan for its part tends to sit closer to Japan in terms of how its nerds spend money, both the locals and the transplants.
I just finished the Siege of Terra book "Lost and the Damned" and I'd argue it's a perfect example of why the answer would be "no".
Terra is being defended by some of it's noblest warriors. The Imperial Fists. The Blood Angels. The White Scars and their "Primarch of the people".
They're fighting for literally the survival of the human race. If Horus wins, things go down the toilet, Chaos has won, enjoy the minutes you have left before a Slaaneshi daemon pops out of your neighbor and catches you.
We as the all-knowing audience understand this. And that knowledge is contrasted against the experience of an average Joe thrust into the conflict against his will. (Possibly spoilers, added the tag just in case)
Spoiler:
What he and his fellow citizens experience makes the battle of Passchendaele look like a walk in the park. They are meat shields, and they know it. All of the extreme hunger, sickness, terror and pain they're experiencing is to buy the guys up in the palace a few more seconds. And that's it.
And they know it.
And to top it all off you get some glimpses of what the actual "lost and damned" are going through... and it's virtually identical.
The only difference between them is that after months of the most traumatic war experience probably ever experienced until that point, the handful that are left are allowed inside the walls by their "noble protectors".
All of this suffering and brutality and deadly pragmatism in what is supposed to be the most black/white battle in the lore.
Nah I don't think they're dimming it down. Like others have said a million times in this thread, the slightest scratch beneath the surface gives you all the grimdark you'll need.
So from what I gather in this topic a lot of people miss the pencil sketch type of artwork that was done on a low budget and confuse that with loss of "grim dark"
Others are set in their way, followers of Nurgle, who hate change. They don't want any new lore, and mistake new developments for a loss in grim darkness of the setting. Again, this is not the case. A lot of individuals who hold this view get their lore knowledge from 1d4chan summaries.
I've noticed that a lot of the 4Chan wiki type sites can have good information, but they are very opinionated articles by and large. They are far from "cold hard facts" and much closer to interpretations of the writers. Units don't just "underperform" they are "outright swearword trash" type descriptions.
Ishagu wrote: So from what I gather in this topic a lot of people miss the pencil sketch type of artwork that was done on a low budget and confuse that with loss of "grim dark"
Ishagu wrote: So from what I gather in this topic a lot of people miss the pencil sketch type of artwork that was done on a low budget and confuse that with loss of "grim dark"
Others are set in the way, followers of Nurgle, who hate change. They don't want any new lore, and mistake new developments for a loss in grim darkness of the setting. Again, this is not the case. A lot of individuals who hold this view get their lore knowledge from 1d4chan summaries.
A change in the setting that causes it to become less grim, or less dark in tone, is a change that reduces the amount of "grimdark" in the setting.
At this point, a lot of the grimdark in the "main narrative" of 40k is told rather than shown. "Oh god, everything is so horrible, the cicadia copyrightum has opened up and divided the universe.
To illustrate that point, here is a ton of different battle scenes in which the imperium wins without significant difficulty.
Wow, such tension!"
The worst the imperium has come off since the 13th crusade has been in the most recent PA book, which was a stalemate between Tau/GSC/Guard. Each of the three had a victory within the story.
Ishagu wrote: Read the novels, not just the campaign books.
Here's my issue. The novels kinda suck. And back in the day the imagery and stories in the basic literature BRB/Codexes was more impactful. I don't want to have to dig for the grimdark.
The novels aren't Shakespeare's works, but the recent books are strong compared to past 40k stories, and are decent pulp Sci-Fi. If you care about the lore read them, if you don't care enough about the lore to invest soms effort into the novels why complain about it? You only care a tiny bit, enough to read some codex blurb? The biggest change people can't grasp is the fact that 40k is now a story and not just a setting.
Stories are told in novels. Settings and campaigns are described in codexes.
40k started as satire, then became comically grim dark absurd, and now it has the best balance.
Ishagu wrote: The novels aren't Shakespeare's works, but the recent works are strong compared to past 40k stories, and are decent pulp Sci-Fi. If you care about the lore read them, if you don't care enough about the lore to invest soms effort into the novels why complain about it? You only care a tiny bit, enough to read some codex blurb?
40k started as satire, then became comically grim dark absurd, and now it has the best balance.
"Pssh, you think Star Wars: The Phantom Menace is some kind of...of poorly written, poorly characterized shlock? You CHARLATAN, you PHILISTINE I say, if you won't invest the effort even to read the excellent novelization how can you even begin to comprehend the complex interweave of motivations, the deep characterization of such personnes d'importe as Jar Jar Binks and Darth Maul?
A lot of true fans of Star Wars do take an interest in the extended universe.
Be glad GW didn't erase it all like Disney did with Star Wars.
Also this topic isn't about the quality of the story, it's about grim darkness. The answer is no, it has not been lost. It just isn't as satirical and absurd as before, but just as strong.
Ishagu wrote: So from what I gather in this topic a lot of people miss the pencil sketch type of artwork that was done on a low budget and confuse that with loss of "grim dark"
Others are set in the way, followers of Nurgle, who hate change. They don't want any new lore, and mistake new developments for a loss in grim darkness of the setting. Again, this is not the case. A lot of individuals who hold this view get their lore knowledge from 1d4chan summaries.
A change in the setting that causes it to become less grim, or less dark in tone, is a change that reduces the amount of "grimdark" in the setting.
At this point, a lot of the grimdark in the "main narrative" of 40k is told rather than shown. "Oh god, everything is so horrible, the cicadia copyrightum has opened up and divided the universe.
To illustrate that point, here is a ton of different battle scenes in which the imperium wins without significant difficulty.
Wow, such tension!"
The worst the imperium has come off since the 13th crusade has been in the most recent PA book, which was a stalemate between Tau/GSC/Guard. Each of the three had a victory within the story.
Don't tell them about Warhammer Horror. They only read the codex and have no interest in actually understanding the finer points of the setting and lore.
Ishagu wrote: Don't tell them about Warhammer Horror. They only read the codex and have no interest in actually understanding the finer points of the setting and lore.
Stories are told in novels. Settings and campaigns are described in codexes.
The impression of the setting is what I'm after. What is the impression given by the entry points into the game? BRB and codexes.
If an impression is all you have you can't make a real judgement. Hence it's only an impression.
Umm, no. I can make a judgement based off an impression, this a cornerstone of disciplines like advertising or cinematography. Or I can simply judge the effectiveness of an impression.
Ishagu wrote: Don't tell them about Warhammer Horror. They only read the codex and have no interest in actually understanding the finer points of the setting and lore.
Stories are told in novels. Settings and campaigns are described in codexes.
The impression of the setting is what I'm after. What is the impression given by the entry points into the game? BRB and codexes.
If an impression is all you have you can't make a real judgement. Hence it's only an impression.
Rule One, dude. Rule One. Simmer down about three points, and you’re golden
The reason I shared Warhammer Horror is because it’s a natural counterpoint to the ‘but they’re making Chibis’ stuff.
GW are, in the eternal search for ever more cash, branching out quote considerably. That some stuff is just sort of, mass market appeal. It’s absolutely not a sign of GW ‘chickening our’ or ‘cleansing’ the background. Just sussing out possible new revenue streams.
I mean, I can buy Jason, Freddie, Chucky, Pinhead etc cuddly toys, if I really want. But that in absolutely no way stops them all being icons of horror.
I would probably think of it as more grimdark if what happened in the novels actually meant anything on the tabletop.
"Oh, the Sapphire King is fething with the Iron Hands? Why didn't they just delete her with bolters? She's got a 5++ save and only 16 wounds at T7. This novel is dumb."
It's not very grimdark when ANAPHALAXAS, DAEMON-KING OF TEN THOUSAND WORLDS is trivially one-rounded by a single average detachment of space marines, with loads and loads of firepower to spare. Heck, they could probably kill his brothers VORSOTHUMEDES, LORD OF THE EFFULGENT PAIN and GEORGE, THE BARRISTER with the stray bullets.
Ishagu wrote: Read the novels, not just the campaign books.
Here's my issue. The novels kinda suck. And back in the day the imagery and stories in the basic literature BRB/Codexes was more impactful. I don't want to have to dig for the grimdark.
This is true.
The poke at the vainglorious sociopaths who run the contemporary world was the element that made the grimdark so visceral in the past. It was a mirror on our own state of affairs.
Turning this point to the current world, things are dramatically worse today than 30 years ago for most people, but the sociopathy has taken on a glossy veneer as mass media has become so fully corrupted against any window on truth... look at what the US is doing to Julian Assange.
40k reflects this turn. I think that this is a turn for the worse. I also appreciated the in your face-ness of the parody that was 40k. This is hidden away even as GW turned into a harlot for shareholder short term interests. Most disturbing for me however has been the rapidity with which fanbois circle the wagons around this corrupted enterprise in defense of the profit seeking profligacy.
Glossy veneer. This is what we see when we see 40k. Dig deeper and you get C grade fanfiction posing as so called lore... just profit taking that waters down the legacy until soon enough the bubble will burst and Restartes will be in Happy Meals. Yuk.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I would probably think of it as more grimdark if what happened in the novels actually meant anything on the tabletop.
"Oh, the Sapphire King is fething with the Iron Hands? Why didn't they just delete her with bolters? She's got a 5++ save and only 16 wounds at T7. This novel is dumb."
It's not very grimdark when ANAPHALAXAS, DAEMON-KING OF TEN THOUSAND WORLDS is trivially one-rounded by a single average detachment of space marines, with loads and loads of firepower to spare. Heck, they could probably kill his brothers VORSOTHUMEDES, LORD OF THE EFFULGENT PAIN and GEORGE, THE BARRISTER with the stray bullets.
One cannot represent the GrimDark on the tabletop.
Why?
Because in the background, everything is dialled to 11, except for the winners, who are dialled to 11 and a bit.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I would probably think of it as more grimdark if what happened in the novels actually meant anything on the tabletop.
"Oh, the Sapphire King is fething with the Iron Hands? Why didn't they just delete her with bolters? She's got a 5++ save and only 16 wounds at T7. This novel is dumb."
It's not very grimdark when ANAPHALAXAS, DAEMON-KING OF TEN THOUSAND WORLDS is trivially one-rounded by a single average detachment of space marines, with loads and loads of firepower to spare. Heck, they could probably kill his brothers VORSOTHUMEDES, LORD OF THE EFFULGENT PAIN and GEORGE, THE BARRISTER with the stray bullets.
One cannot represent the GrimDark on the tabletop.
Why?
Because in the background, everything is dialled to 11, except for the winners, who are dialled to 11 and a bit.
Just leave everyone dialed to 11 and don't have a designated winner, letting dice variance (or player skill variance, in greater part) define who that winner is.
40k needs dialed down to a 6 and falling. 11 was the glory of early empire. Now we live in the wreckage. Close enough to reality as to regain its poignancy and purpose. But out of the contemproary consumers' depths ...
Ishagu wrote: The novels aren't Shakespeare's works, but the recent works are strong compared to past 40k stories, and are decent pulp Sci-Fi. If you care about the lore read them, if you don't care enough about the lore to invest soms effort into the novels why complain about it? You only care a tiny bit, enough to read some codex blurb?
40k started as satire, then became comically grim dark absurd, and now it has the best balance.
"Pssh, you think Star Wars: The Phantom Menace is some kind of...of poorly written, poorly characterized shlock? You CHARLATAN, you PHILISTINE I say, if you won't invest the effort even to read the excellent novelization how can you even begin to comprehend the complex interweave of motivations, the deep characterization of such personnes d'importe as Jar Jar Binks and Darth Maul?
Begone from my sight! I judge ye Not A True Fan!"
While I hate the notion of "you've got to read ALL the material to be a True Fan" (as if such a thing exists), or implying that there is even one True Way of engaging with 40k, they do have a point (maybe if not articulated quite how I'd say it).
There is plenty of grimdark 40k lore. If you don't read it, that doesn't mean it's not out there, and isn't the kind of grimdark stuff there always used to be.
There’s no requirement to read the novels in order to be a fan.
But, to weigh in on the background? Well......they’re all canon, so to not read them, and then form a conclusion about something ultimately nebulous? It’s not often I’ll say this, but it does mean your opinion doesn’t carry as much weight as someone who has.
There’s no requirement to read the novels in order to be a fan.
But, to weigh in on the background? Well......they’re all canon, so to not read them, and then form a conclusion about something ultimately nebulous? It’s not often I’ll say this, but it does mean your opinion doesn’t carry as much weight as someone who has.
Sort of. Technically I agree with this statement. But what I was trying to get at is a sort of guage in terms of necessary exposure to reach a certain "level of grimdark". Some prior editions of 40K have grimdark more up front, some put it more to the background. In 2nd Ed, the boxes and miniature art were very bright and colorful, but opening the rulebook/codex imperialis the flavor content of the interior tended to give a darker impression. How does the product reveal itself to you? What is the impression you come away with after looking at it for five minutes? On a scale of 1 to 10, rate your impression of the setting from "grimdark" to "heroic".
You could even split it up in terms of level of exposure, starting with marketing material through to esoteric novelization. Art plays a huuuuge role in this, as visual art will blast impressions at a person long before they read the contents of a novel.
Ishagu wrote: And yet when I say it people tend to disagree.
Must be the way I come across in written format
Seriously? Quite possibly. I work in the financial complaint industry. And I’m very good at what I do, because I choose my words and phrases carefully, and couch the message in simple but precise terms. If I didn’t do that (and I haven’t always), work would become a PITA.
It’s genuinely a skill, but happily one all can learn, given time. My top tip? Type out what you want to say, then go and have a nice cup of tea. Cuppa enjoyed? Come back to your writing, and put yourself in the shoes of the other person.
Look for obvious triggers ( no, not in that way), and bits you thought of but didn’t quite nail first time around. Edit it. Then read it out loud (I am genuinely not joking here). If you’re happy with it? Post. If not, edit.
And if you find it hard to get the right words down? That’s your brain telling you there’s something niggling away you’ve failed to find out or address.
Now, most of that is my professional approach. And I’m nowhere near that conscientious on Dakka. But, the pointers and rules still work out pretty nice
But most of all? Never, ever just assume the respondee is an idiot.
Be polite. Be precise. Address their comments, not them.
There’s no requirement to read the novels in order to be a fan.
But, to weigh in on the background? Well......they’re all canon, so to not read them, and then form a conclusion about something ultimately nebulous? It’s not often I’ll say this, but it does mean your opinion doesn’t carry as much weight as someone who has.
Sort of. Technically I agree with this statement. But what I was trying to get at is a sort of guage in terms of necessary exposure to reach a certain "level of grimdark". Some prior editions of 40K have grimdark more up front, some put it more to the background. In 2nd Ed, the boxes and miniature art were very bright and colorful, but opening the rulebook/codex imperialis the flavor content of the interior tended to give a darker impression. How does the product reveal itself to you? What is the impression you come away with after looking at it for five minutes? On a scale of 1 to 10, rate your impression of the setting from "grimdark" to "heroic".
You could even split it up in terms of level of exposure, starting with marketing material through to esoteric novelization. Art plays a huuuuge role in this, as visual art will blast impressions at a person long before they read the contents of a novel.
What you’re saying?
I agree. 100%. But I’m highly allergic to being a Gate Keeper, so I can’t say where that line lies.
But, what gets my goat is when others express a singularly uninformed opinion. As in, they’ve read one sliver of the background, and therefore they’re right.
Because when it comes to lore as colossal as 40k’s? And when there’s sad old gorgnards such as myself. Who recall but cannot cite obscure WD passages and paragraphs, and for all I can prove it I might as well have imagined the whole thing?
Nobody is right. None of us
Example? As mentioned earlier, I’ve recently got me copies of the Realm of Chaos Books. The background within is largely recognisable. And some stuff (Nurgle being jovial in nature) hasn’t changed a bit. But an awful, awful lot has changed.
Some stuff (perpetuals spring to mind) have kinda returned, after a fashion. But changed.
The Sensei, Starchild, Malal and other obscurities? Yeah. So far as I’m aware*? Never turned up beyond the Rogue Trader era.
*look at that phrase. It’s deliberately not definitive. I am not presenting myself as the final word in background knowledge. I accept there’s far more I’ve not read, than I have read. Some novels just don’t interest me, but I still accept they’ve something to say. I’m not Gate Keeping!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Interpretation of 40k also depends on your pop culture.
Whilst I fully get and appreciate that Slaanesh is about excess in all things? Finding some kind of joy in each and every exeperience? And how quickly that will burn someone out of ‘normal’?
The Rocky Horror Picture Shown shall always be my touchstone on such things.
For some, Khorne simply doesn’t give a flip from whence the blood flows. For others? That’s ultimately true, but to seek out and fight the strongest? That’s just more worthy. It increases one’s devotion.
Tzeentch? Well. If I set a particularly evil pub quiz (name a large hairy Dog. Sorry, it’s Kevin) is one thing. I can delve into my Nerd Knowledge and quite possibly write one so utterly obscure, nobody scores any points. But for proper favour? I need to be way smarter and cunning than I actually am.
Nurgle? I could contract and carry all His diseases. And then just sort of sit around, enjoying the pustules and playing with me Nurglings (oooooer!). But as much as that in itself pleases Nurgle? Going out and spreading His bounty is just that step above, doesn’t even need to be in combat.
All that the Chaos Gods really demand isn’t loyalty and devotion. That we then introduce our own humanity to that? That’s where proper insanity kicks.
Consider Orks.
I can read the background. I can absorb and understand the background. But as a natural pacifist? I’ll never, ever get it.
And so on and so forth.
No one Nerd is the font of all 40k, AoS or GW knowledge. We can get three or more Nerds to read a PA ‘prediction page’ (you know the ones).....and we’ll all have our own conclusions and theories, depending upon what else we’ve read, and how that influenced our thought process.
And that?
That is why GW have such intriguing background. There are breadcrumbs to follow, but nothing is absolutely definitive.
So we all follow said breadcrumbs, and we’ll all wind up at a slightly different Witch’s Hut,
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Thats bizare - Nurglings have always been like that from day one. Cute, smelly fat diseased imps. I have plenty of the old metal Nurglings as well.
Are you trying to troll me? The metal nurglings aren't comparable in any way to the plastic trash we got today. And no, the nurglings which I am talking about are not from 1990. They were introduced around 3rd.
The only smiling dude was the Great Unclean One which is fine with me. But nowadays we have cartoonish nurglings too and the abyssmal guy who rides on a slug. He looks as stupid as the Necron who thinks he is Michael "Air" Jordan. Who should take these morons seriously? Short answer: No one. That's why Grimdark is dead and the Age of Cringe finally arrived into 40K.
Literally wrong. Go on SoLegends. Look at the Nurglings (MDG has even provided the page ITT). Note how jolly they look, one is even tittering for himself. I’ve had this out with you before but you won’t have it so kindly jog on with this incorrect rhetoric.
Nurglings from 3rd is my topic and none of them have this stupid grin on their face like the plastic ones. Comprende?
@MDGrotsnik All well and good. But to a few specific points:
"Nobody is right. None of us"
We can make observations about how the product presentation or lore changes over the years.
"That is why GW have such intriguing background. There are breadcrumbs to follow, but nothing is absolutely definitive."
Some things, particularly the Horus Heresy, have become faaaaar more defined than they once were. Obviously, as a franchise moves forward more things will be added and/or further defined. Sometimes this is good, sometimes it can be poorly handled or detrimental.
Even beyond that, tone can change without individual facts or story elements changing.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
It began with the introduction of the cute smiling Nurglings. Killed the horror of the warp right there. This comes from a Nurgle player who uses exclusively old metal Nurglings.
Thats bizare - Nurglings have always been like that from day one. Cute, smelly fat diseased imps. I have plenty of the old metal Nurglings as well.
Are you trying to troll me? The metal nurglings aren't comparable in any way to the plastic trash we got today. And no, the nurglings which I am talking about are not from 1990. They were introduced around 3rd.
The only smiling dude was the Great Unclean One which is fine with me. But nowadays we have cartoonish nurglings too and the abyssmal guy who rides on a slug. He looks as stupid as the Necron who thinks he is Michael "Air" Jordan. Who should take these morons seriously? Short answer: No one. That's why Grimdark is dead and the Age of Cringe finally arrived into 40K.
Literally wrong. Go on SoLegends. Look at the Nurglings (MDG has even provided the page ITT). Note how jolly they look, one is even tittering for himself. I’ve had this out with you before but you won’t have it so kindly jog on with this incorrect rhetoric.
Can't you read? Nurglings from 3rd is my topic and none of them have this stupid grin on their face like the plastic ones. Comprende?
When you say "It began with the introduction of cute, smiley nurglings", but "cute and smiley", or "cartoonish" are also features of the original nurglings from 1990, it get's weird.
Today I had an idea for a Black Library book or series of books about a battle between the Word Bearers and the Black Templars, backed up by Sisters of Battle, over control of a planet. Loyalists and Chaos followers are scattered to varying degrees across the world's various populations, with different degrees of zeal. When both sides arrive, in the respective zones that they control, they enact extreme measures to try to 'purify' the populations, being very reminiscent of how ISIS and other extremist organizations behave when they come to power. In Word Bearers regions, altars are erected and mass sacrifices are performed, some of them very long and torturous. Anybody even suspected of being loyal to the Imperium or of worshipping the Emperor would be subject to immediate death or enslavement. In the areas controlled by the Templars and the Sisters, anyone not expressing immediate and absolute loyalty to the Emperor, often through having to sacrifice almost all of their goods towards the war effort, could be purged on site. Oh, you need that medicine for your sick mother and don't want to have to give it all to the auxilia troops? Blam! Anyone questioning in the slightest the actions of the Imperial forces are at serious risk of, again, death or enslavement. To make things even grittier, the majority of the atrocities committed would not be done by the official armed forces, who would be too busy fighting the war, but by average humans tasked with cleansing their particular sides of those assumed to be enemies. Gangs of demented Chaos cultists (both zealous followers and those who just want to take advantage of the situation) would roam around extorting, torturing, enslaving, raping, and killing anyone who they got their hands on, all in the name 'liberating' the planet from the Imperium. On the loyalist side, rogue Arbites would brutalize anyone they wanted, confiscating anything they wanted under the guise of helping the war effort. Hordes of pious Emperor-worshippers, occasionally led by exceptionally zealous Sisters, would pore through neighborhoods, incinerating anyone they believe to be a heretic even in the loosest sense. Your brother knows someone who might possibly be connected to a Chaos cult? Best to be safe and burn you all. Former friends would turn against each other out of fear or to try to use the chaos to get something from you that they want. Old scores, such as ethnic rivalries, would erupt into violence, using the war as an excuse to commit atrocities. Violence against suspected mutants and other percieved deviant groups would flare up. Religious figures on both sides would rile up huge mobs to attack whole communities suspected of aiding the enemy.
The story would not be told from the point of view of the Marines or Sisters, but from average people who are desperately trying to survive and escape, on both sides of the conflict; people huddling together in refugee camps and traveling in large columns, vulnerable to all manner of abuse and often forced to seek 'protection' from those who often abuse and extort them in different ways. When the Marines, inquisitors, Sisters and other big players came into view, at best they would see the suffering as necessary to get the job done, with little thought to the needs of the common people, and at worse, would congratulate the abusers on doing what is necessary to force the population to accept the authority of the occupying forces and getting them to 'donate' to the respective causes. There would be no scenes of glory, no flashy space fantasy theatrics, nothing for TTS to riff off of, just suffering and death.
Now a story like that would be a way to keep the grimdark.
There’s no requirement to read the novels in order to be a fan.
But, to weigh in on the background? Well......they’re all canon, so to not read them, and then form a conclusion about something ultimately nebulous? It’s not often I’ll say this, but it does mean your opinion doesn’t carry as much weight as someone who has.
Sort of. Technically I agree with this statement. But what I was trying to get at is a sort of guage in terms of necessary exposure to reach a certain "level of grimdark". Some prior editions of 40K have grimdark more up front, some put it more to the background. In 2nd Ed, the boxes and miniature art were very bright and colorful, but opening the rulebook/codex imperialis the flavor content of the interior tended to give a darker impression. How does the product reveal itself to you? What is the impression you come away with after looking at it for five minutes? On a scale of 1 to 10, rate your impression of the setting from "grimdark" to "heroic".
You could even split it up in terms of level of exposure, starting with marketing material through to esoteric novelization. Art plays a huuuuge role in this, as visual art will blast impressions at a person long before they read the contents of a novel.
I think 2ed and rogue trader worked much harder to set the grim dark vibe probably because there wasn’t the same amount of supporting material so they had to. And I think the artwork was much bleaker and more distopian. I bought the latest DA and CSM codexes and I find them to be quite lack lustre. Almost as if the GW writers are a bit bored of representing the same stories.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: How long do you think they'll last once Gue'la start worshipping Chaos? I mean, they allow pretty much any worship. Will they figure it out before a warp rift is opened and a planet falls to Daemons? They've only got brute force to rely on. No hexagrammic, no faith miracles etc. Just shoot, shoot and shoot some more.
I hadn't thought about that. Unless the Tau get a handle on human psykers really quickly. very bad things are going to happen. For example, what would their response be when some enslavers start to appear?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: How long do you think they'll last once Gue'la start worshipping Chaos? I mean, they allow pretty much any worship. Will they figure it out before a warp rift is opened and a planet falls to Daemons? They've only got brute force to rely on. No hexagrammic, no faith miracles etc. Just shoot, shoot and shoot some more.
I hadn't thought about that. Unless the Tau get a handle on human psykers really quickly. very bad things are going to happen. For example, what would their response be when some enslavers start to appear?
The fact that there are no Kroot Shamans anymore could imply that they've started quietly executing psykers among their subject races.
AnomanderRake wrote: The fact that there are no Kroot Shamans anymore could imply that they've started quietly executing psykers among their subject races.
Well they still have the Nicassar, who are all psykers.
Did they ever detail what Tau use for FTL communication? I had assumed that they use the Nicassar but am not sure.
Mr.Omega wrote: I've been disappointed by the newer Codexes and supplements over the last few years. There's been a shift away from the old style of books with plentiful amounts of grayscale artwork with more emphasis on theme and composition rather than detail. These days, reading the unit pages feels like browsing a product catalogue with the high res photos of each unit in colour schemes that don't resonate. The old photo gallery section which was fine as its own thing as has been cut down so much that its inclusion is basically pointless. Where there is art in the books, its hit or miss, and almost always where GW have hired a digital artist off the internet to draw something hyper-detailed and cleanly drawn that strictly resembles the associated products where older art show something more distinct and fascinating.
And that's where I feel the biggest hit to the "grimdark" atmosphere of the game has been. I still flick through my 4th and 5th edition IG Codexes to look at the art and read the written material, whereas I only open the newer ones if I need to check a rule.
Case in point, Its art like this that sticks with me when I close the book and put it away:
I've been thinking about it, and I think part of it is the style of art. There is just a lot of texture in the old black and white art GW used that has been washed out in the newer color art. A lot of the new stuff is smoother and doesn't have the same grittiness the ink drawings did.
So basically we've determined that hand drawn art is better than digital? Shocker.
Might I point out that most, if not all, of those images are from when gw actually gave a feth about its artists. Remember when every picture in a codex or issue of wd had a symbol next to it that told you who had drawn it?
Insectum7 wrote: Yeah. . . much of this falls under the banner of "It's all there, but it ain't quite the same. . . "
Spoiler:
And I'll take the first one, any day of the week.
That really nails what I was talking about. The second is too clean. Where's the massive pyres of smoke and flame? Where's the still burning Marine body? The Marine whose only a torso?
The first sells a certain horror of war, the second sells a big damn hero moment.
To be fair, the latter is more in line with 3rd edition's Inquisitorial propaganda flavor that all the lore was written with (often with some subtle information that people missed). It feels like something the Imperium would commision to hang on a wall in the Planetary Governor's palace.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: So basically we've determined that hand drawn art is better than digital? Shocker.
Might I point out that most, if not all, of those images are from when gw actually gave a feth about its artists. Remember when every picture in a codex or issue of wd had a symbol next to it that told you who had drawn it?
It's less the medium and more the way it's done. I can find plenty of digital art that hits that grimdark asthetic, but there is something about the specific art direction GW has taken 40k that has lost some of that grimdarkness.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: How long do you think they'll last once Gue'la start worshipping Chaos? I mean, they allow pretty much any worship. Will they figure it out before a warp rift is opened and a planet falls to Daemons? They've only got brute force to rely on. No hexagrammic, no faith miracles etc. Just shoot, shoot and shoot some more.
I hadn't thought about that. Unless the Tau get a handle on human psykers really quickly. very bad things are going to happen. For example, what would their response be when some enslavers start to appear?
And that's not even getting into humanity potentially creating a god of "the Greater Good".
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
That's fair, but a lot of the B&W art just has a -lot- more detail than most of the modern color art.
And it's not like I hate the new art, I just feel it's a bit lacking to the older art when it comes to selling a certain feeling.
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
That's fair, but a lot of the B&W art just has a -lot- more detail than most of the modern color art.
I agree, to make a black and white image look "finished" often requires greater detail. You wind up paying more attention to texture. Or in terms of time, because no time is spent on color it's spent on detail instead.
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
That's fair, but a lot of the B&W art just has a -lot- more detail than most of the modern color art.
I agree, to make a black and white image look "finished" often requires greater detail. You wind up paying more attention to texture. Or in terms of time, because no time is spent on color it's spent on detail instead.
I think that's where the problem is: the detail on color isn't as high on the digital art. Likely because they're streamlining things with digital shaders and other tricks to get stuff done quicker to meet shorter deadlines.
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
Give me "crude" any time. The old stuff reminds me of classic punk and metal albums. The new stuff looks like boring power metal.
A note about color. Amatuer black and white art looks crude, but amateur color art often looks garish. Crude works better for grimdark. If you're gonna go cheap for 40k, go b&w.
Give me "crude" any time. The old stuff reminds me of classic punk and metal albums. The new stuff looks like boring power metal.
Amebix beats Dragon Force. Every. Fething. Time.
Power metal isn't always boring (I agree about Dragon Force though, not a fan), but yeah, the art direction is probably the biggest factor. We take in a lot about the setting from the art and the current art doesn't sell the darkness of the actual written lore.
Ishagu wrote: The Crimson Fist art example a few posts up is a clear example of this. The new art is better, but there isn't a 20 year long connection to it.
Well you can't really call one better, as it is art and so highly subjective. I can say that I prefer the old one, although they both have merit. I find that the overall texture of the old piece feels a lot more visceral, whereas I find the new piece to be too clean for me. Personally, I find the older, grittier representation to be preferable to the more realistic style, although they are certainly both of good quality.
That's the thing though, there is no right answer when it comes to opinion.
I could analyse those two pictures for days, there is so much to talk about!
The difference in the bolter fire, with the long trails drawing the eye to the centre of the Fist's position, which is not done in the latter image. The fire around the Gargant making it look like it has legs, and so be more of a looming presence than the modern version.
There are parts of the modern image I like, of course. The sky trails feel a lot more like they are from space, as the straightness gives more of a feeling of speed and of them penetrating the atmosphere. The marines themselves are a lot more emotionless and stoic. Although I kind of like the emotion in the early image, it is not so fitting with modern 40k interpretations.
I'll stop with the amateur art critic. I do like both, and whilst my preference is with the older one, they both offer different versions of what 40k is.
No, those are facts. The new art is more realistic and more grim. The older art is more like a cartoon.
You can prefer the older art, that is an opinion, and that is perfectly fine. It isn't more grim dark however. It has more flair, I guess, and it certainly has the advantage of nostalgia.
It certainly is not evidence of the setting losing the grim dark.
Ishagu wrote: No, those are facts. The new art is more realistic and more grim. The older art is more like a cartoon.
You can prefer the older art, that is an opinion, and that is perfectly fine. It isn't more grim dark however. It has more flair, I guess, and it certainly has the advantage of nostalgia.
It certainly is not evidence of the setting losing the grim dark.
Nope, still opinion. Although I'll agree that it isn't proof that 40k is less grimdark.
Ishagu wrote: That's subjective, you defeat yourself with your own arguments.
If you prefer the old art that's perfectly fine. Just be aware that nostalgia goggles blind objective opinion. Don't be stuck in the past.
It's wasn't an argument it was a joke. YOU'RE the one who's arguing that your subjective opinion is fact, and everyone else is "blinded by nostalgia". Some of us prefer raw, unpolished stuff over sterile corporate product.
I'll keep my Motorhead albums. Enjoy your Nickel Back.
But if something is obviously a cartoon style, by simultaneously being grim dark it actually becomes a satire.
That's my point. The older 40k style was satire, it didn't take itself seriously. It presented an overly dark and gritty set of codex books alongside super bright and clean models and often a cartoon, silly style of artwork. The first introduction to 40k for me wasn't some serious book, it was some bright blue and yellow soldiers fighting space Orks on a tabletop.
As someone who's been in and out of 40K since the RT era, I think 3rd and 4th editions were peak grimdark. 'Current' 40K feels like the grimdark has been dialed back a bit, but it's still far more grimdark than 2nd edition was.
I can't properly assess RT's level of grimdark, as it was so variable. Some of RT was 80s Judge Dreddd / Paranoia levels of deliberately ridiculous black humour (what we might call 'grimderp' nowadays, except that it was purposely self-mocking rather than just accidentally naff). Some of it was more serious Swiftian satire. And quite a lot was just a humorous pastiche of fantasy RPG tropes (e.g. elves who are a dying remnant of a fallen civilization... but IN SPACE!).
But 2nd edition had Imperial worlds signing permanent military alliances with Eldar craftworlds, and the Inquisition and Adeptus Terra being perfectly fine with that. It also had Eldar feeling genuine remorse and pity when they were forced to kill human Chaos cultists. And the Great Crusade wasn't described as having been waged to exterminate all non-human life in the Galaxy, but specifically to destroy the most hostile alien species that couldn't be reasoned with.
So don't anyone try to claim 2nd edition was more grimdark or less noblebright than 8th.
Ishagu wrote: No, those are facts. The new art is more realistic and more grim. The older art is more like a cartoon.
You can prefer the older art, that is an opinion, and that is perfectly fine. It isn't more grim dark however. It has more flair, I guess, and it certainly has the advantage of nostalgia.
It certainly is not evidence of the setting losing the grim dark.
I feel like you're looking at the colors and proportions and not the actual content. The more "cartoony" one is the one giving a grimmer picture of war with more horrific casualties, and the smoke choked battlefield. Sorry, but your better proportioned guys are the ones who are sitting on a pile of skulls which looks more like a satire than anything.
So in this case I can't say you're right. Content is just as, if not more, important than art style.
How long do you think they'll last once Gue'la start worshipping Chaos? I mean, they allow pretty much any worship. Will they figure it out before a warp rift is opened and a planet falls to Daemons? They've only got brute force to rely on. No hexagrammic, no faith miracles etc. Just shoot, shoot and shoot some more.
Here's the deal. Why would the Gue'la worship chaos, when all they have to do is look at how their fellows in Imperium are treated to remember how incredibly, amazingly lucky they are to be where they are? Happy, well-fed and safe people rarely commit crimes. At worst you'd have a small group of idiots whose collective faith would spawn a nurgling or a single demonette, given that they'd be mingling with the near psychic-null Tau on the planet. There won't be any massive chaos rebellions happening, unlike say, the inhuman Imperium.
So, seeing as we're talking about the art, I'd actually like to weigh in myself.
I prefer the modern ones.
Now, I'm not saying that anyone is wrong for liking the old ones, or that either is objectively better or "more grimdark", but people on BOTH sides have been making those claims. Both are wrong.
For me, I think the modern ones are MORE grimdark, but that doesn't make it objective. It's art, and I don't think it's particularly fair for either party to point at it and use it as support for either claim. It's not objective, it's not quantifiable, and comes (again) down to perception, like every other discussion on "is 40k still grimdark".
You could look at the widest range of modern 40k material, or only look at the old stuff, and neither would make your argument any more objective.
TL;DR - It's wrong for anyone to claim with any sort of objectivity that either form of artistry is "more grimdark", seeing how subjective both "grimdarkness" and the art itself are.
Automatically Appended Next Post: EDIT: Case in point, the pictures (spoilered) provided here do literally nothing for me. If anything, they make me less interested. Of course, that's just my own perception, but given that ClockworkZion seems to imply that this is some kind of "gotcha" or trump card, it proves my point perfectly. It just falls flat, because it's not an objective medium. There's no "oomph" in that for me.
ClockworkZion wrote:i think the loss of detail is to blame. I mean look at these and tell me the newer, digital art has the same oomph as the traditional stuff:
I liked the old black and white "pencil sketches" because they always seemed to be more an illustrator/journalist who was in the thick of the action had sketched up. I felt more like I was "in" that world. JMO obvs.
I don't know if they were more grimdark or not, in truth that term seems to mean different things to different people and for some folk it is as simple as "things I like = grimdark, things I don't = not".
Dai wrote: I don't know if they were more grimdark or not, in truth that term seems to mean different things to different people and for some folk it is as simple as "things I like = grimdark, things I don't = not".
Exactly: it's difficult to determine what points are "I dislike it, therefore it's not grimdark", and which points are "I don't think it's grimdark, therefore I don't like it".
For me, I think quite a lot of modern art looks better, therefore is more fitting of grimdarkness in my head, and the older stuff with (what I'd say are) goofier proportions, positions, and generally looking a bit flat aren't grimdark to me. However, I wouldn't even try and claim that's objective in any way, and it'd be ridiculous to point at a piece of art and claim it's objectively something which is already a subjective issue anyway.
Ishagu wrote: I think nostalgia is playing with people here and they don't even realise it.
The Crimson Fist art example a few posts up is a clear example of this. The new art is better . .
"Technically more accurate" can have extremely little to do with effectiveness, so citing things like proportion or lighting as "objective" reasons why a piece is more effective isn't exactly a slam dunk. Consider character design from The Incredibles, vs. the character design in The Polar Express. Which has more accurate depictions of human beings? Which is more effective?. Art is far less about "scientific correctness" and much more about "effectiveness". Did the piece achieve what the author set out to achieve?
I'd argue that the original piece, because it's essentially flatly lit, does more for the gritty feel as minor details like wounds, fires and corpses are fighting for the viewers attention nearly as hard as the central figure with a decapitated head. One poster has completely missed that there is a "half-marine" lying dead in the foreground, because the hill of Crimson Fists is essentially in shilouette from the background, and many of the foreground details are lost in shadow. I'd also argue that the "incorrectness" of the image goes further to express the insanity of the universe. Rather than a cinematically framed and polished introduction to the setting, you get raw scribbles of impression and things that make no sense.
One is a crazy universe that is carefully presented to you for viewing. Another is a presentation more raw and unhinged, inviting you to take part in the insanity of the creators themselves. "Join us in our insanity!"
Both are valid, and both can be good. But I'd much prefer the balance to skew back in time a little bit. Less polished insanity and more raw insanity.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I wouldn't even try and claim that's objective in any way, and it'd be ridiculous to point at a piece of art and claim it's objectively something which is already a subjective issue anyway.
Imo, if I were GWs art director, I'd give a healthy mix of both. Simply because different people are going to respond differently to different styles. In 3rd and 4th there was an excellent mix of realistically rendered art, plus a good smattering of the John Blanchian classics. Imo a lot of businesses get spooked by putting out stuff that's less polished, because they fear they'll get flak for publishing an unfinished product. But sometimes because the pieces are more sketchy and unfinished, it leaves the viewer to fill in the details for themselves, or look at them longer to tray and make sense of them. I think GW could go a little crazier in this regard.
But in a hobby like 40K, more raw pieces are also may times going to be the pieces that are more accessible. Seeing stuff that you can potentially create along with the product authors can be huge for aspiring creators. (The painting side of the hobby basically IS that). When we get a glimpse of Jes Goodwins sketches for early Eldar or whatever, the pencil-and-sketchbook medium is obvious. As a young artist, I saw those images and went "I could draw that!". And that gave me handy artistic goals to work towards. There's an automatic "audience inclusion factor" when it's clear how things are made.
They used to have more obviously homemade terrain, and instructions/patterns for doing that too. So, same idea on the "table design" kind of thing.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So, seeing as we're talking about the art, I'd actually like to weigh in myself.
I prefer the modern ones.
Now, I'm not saying that anyone is wrong for liking the old ones, or that either is objectively better or "more grimdark", but people on BOTH sides have been making those claims. Both are wrong.
For me, I think the modern ones are MORE grimdark, but that doesn't make it objective. It's art, and I don't think it's particularly fair for either party to point at it and use it as support for either claim. It's not objective, it's not quantifiable, and comes (again) down to perception, like every other discussion on "is 40k still grimdark".
You could look at the widest range of modern 40k material, or only look at the old stuff, and neither would make your argument any more objective.
TL;DR - It's wrong for anyone to claim with any sort of objectivity that either form of artistry is "more grimdark", seeing how subjective both "grimdarkness" and the art itself are.
Automatically Appended Next Post: EDIT: Case in point, the pictures (spoilered) provided here do literally nothing for me. If anything, they make me less interested. Of course, that's just my own perception, but given that ClockworkZion seems to imply that this is some kind of "gotcha" or trump card, it proves my point perfectly. It just falls flat, because it's not an objective medium. There's no "oomph" in that for me.
ClockworkZion wrote:i think the loss of detail is to blame. I mean look at these and tell me the newer, digital art has the same oomph as the traditional stuff:
Spoiler:
I never intended it as a gotcha, but rather it was something that just kind of clicked for me as I was looking for something and found that the new art felt too smooth and clean compared to the older art. There is a noticable lack of detail when you compare the two (detail they even color over when reusing the old art) that just takes something away from the new art. And that's not even getting into the toning down of some of the conent.
Art is a subjective thing, so I won't claim that there is a "right" way to art, but I feel like we subconsciously noticed the changes in the art and that, for most people, has made it feel less grimdark without being able to put a pin in the reason why.
I also prefer animation that doesn't look like CGI.
Hand drawn, human interpretations through a physical medium are more visceral, have more feeling and are indeed more worthy of admiration than anything produced with software.
Just my opinion? Try doing one, then try doing the other.
One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
ClockworkZion wrote:I never intended it as a gotcha
In which case, I offer my apologies for misreading your comment. Sorry!
Art is a subjective thing, so I won't claim that there is a "right" way to art, but I feel like we subconsciously noticed the changes in the art and that, for most people, has made it feel less grimdark without being able to put a pin in the reason why.
If many people associated the grimdarkness with the "texture" of the art, then I can see why they'd feel it was lost. But as someone who didn't really associate the art with the grimdarkness (or essence thereof), it wasn't really a factor for me, and in many cases, more modern art is more "40k" than older stuff - at least, for me.
Basically, with a subjective medium, trying to find an answer to a subjective question isn't really appropriate!
To me as long as the Doom Eagles are still in 40k it will always been Grimdark. Seriously, their initiation rites are crazy.
As others have said, I think the Grimdark, which I always took as an edgy, angsty teenage way to manufacture maturity in a setting, is still there. I think it has just been pushed further into the margins the further we get from the 1990s.
Which when I see that black and white ink and pencil art: the 1990s. Maybe the late 1980s if you count Larry Elmore type stuff. I guess we could the 1990s were just a Grimdark decade where trench coat and sunglasses wearing vampires wielded katana vs. cybernetic demon secret agents covered in pouches and straps. Unironically.
I think that aesthetic comes off kitsch to most of those younger than Generation X. Much in the same way much of Generation X is pretty disinterested in Westerns or Rayguns and Rockets sci-fi. I remember watching the Crow with some people about 10 years my junior. All the Gothic brooding and angst of the movie was hilarious to them. They said it was the most nineties thing ever. Me, I have fond memories of watching with my girlfriend way back in high school and listening to the soundtrack a lot. It was a wake up call to me that there was a temporal cultural gulf between us even if it was just ten years maybe less.
Honestly, I think 40k is like Batman and can be as dark or light serious or comical as anyone wants Bruce Wayne, Gothem or any other part of what Bill Kane started. Everything is possible and what is currently most popular is how either get framed to attract modern audiences. Which is fine by me. I like the idea of all my armies running the gamut. My Black Legion can be self-deceiving monsters of humanity seeking only to destroy and enslave in the name of dark gods to Saturday Morning Cartoon Villains screaming 'We get you next time!" as they run away from this week's failed scheme.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
Nl one said that it want a skill.
But no one will be painting murals with it...
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
Ummm... programming? Cinematography involving CGI. Ok.. anything not requiring a machine? Look, facts are that tech saves labor. Sure using tech involves skill. As much? I argue no. As transferable into other domains irl not requiring a specific tech? I argue no.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
Nl one said that it want a skill.
But no one will be painting murals with it...
I would disagree with you there. People can- and have- created beautiful art with computers.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
Ummm... programming? Cinematography involving CGI. Ok.. anything not requiring a machine? Look, facts are that tech saves labor. Sure using tech involves skill. As much? I argue no. As transferable into other domains irl not requiring a specific tech? I argue no.
Again, I disagree. To become proficient with CGI requires a huge amount of practice. It is most definitely a very hard skill to learn, to movie-standard at least. That’s why movie’s CGI costs so much- you’re paying for the skill. Also, creating CGI teaches you about composition, lighting, dynamics, etc, etc.
Thirdly, while a professional animator might not be able to pick up a brush and paint the roof of the Sistine chapel, I’d like to see a painter trying to recreate said roof on a computer.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I for one consider something ostensibly kinda cute actually being a surprisingly vicious killer far creepier than 'oh noes, must be evil because evil face'.
DalekCheese wrote: I would disagree with you there. People can- and have- created beautiful art with computers.
I'm going to use the opportunity to plug the Astartes animation series, which was recently restored after the whole "channel stolen" fiasco. Made by one person, you can see the insane levels of skill that can go into some CGI.
I wish that we got actual series from GW that were this quality.
You can definitely produce great art with computers. Detailed, gritty grimdark.
I just don't think much of the current GW stuff reaches that. It's mass produced and far more clinical, with very particular corporate outcomes in mind.
There's a stronger 'catalogue' vibe with the modern stuff.
IMO though, despite the divisiveness of his style, I don't think any GW artist evoked the 40k atmosphere, vibe, feel, je ne sais quoi better than John blanche.
I loved mark Gibbons' illustrations of Jes Goodwin's designs, but whenever I think of the essence of 40k, it's the distorted weirdness and excess of blanche that I think of. I would show people Gibbons work to show how cool it was, but show them Blanche's work to show them '40k'.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Yeah, this whole "only physical art is TRUE artistry" mindset is incredibly reductive.
I ain't sure about that, because it is followed by claims like people playing League of Legends being sports men, and stuff like that. If my grand dad made an error durning scultping it could be 3 months of work down the drain. Someone working on digitial just clicks undo. They are not the same thing, but I don't doubt that people who do digital or e-sports love to think that they are doing the real thing.
Karol wrote: I ain't sure about that, because it is followed by claims like people playing League of Legends being sports men, and stuff like that. If my grand dad made an error durning scultping it could be 3 months of work down the drain. Someone working on digitial just clicks undo. They are not the same thing, but I don't doubt that people who do digital or e-sports love to think that they are doing the real thing.
Coming from somebody who played both soccer and hockey and who follows League of Legends as an e-sport just wow at the level of smug traditionalism in your post. E-sports are at least as much of a sport as golf is given the hours of training, risk of RSIs, and the impact of making precise physical movements under tight time pressure goes.
tell me in which of the e sports, can you get an injury that ends your career on the spot, and maybe ends up with you ending crippled or dead? Because I do wrestling, that is a real sport, which to train I go to a sports school. e-sports, even with their training, teams etc don't come even close.
As I said, my grandfather worked as a restaurator of churchs. If he or someone on his team did an error, this could mean 2-3 months of work down the drain, or sometimes a priceless artefact being for ever destroyed. It is uncomperable to someone being able to fix an error with an undo button.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Yeah, this whole "only physical art is TRUE artistry" mindset is incredibly reductive.
I ain't sure about that, because it is followed by claims like people playing League of Legends being sports men, and stuff like that. If my grand dad made an error durning scultping it could be 3 months of work down the drain. Someone working on digitial just clicks undo. They are not the same thing, but I don't doubt that people who do digital or e-sports love to think that they are doing the real thing.
What does ease of correcting mistakes have to do with whether something is art?
If a painter gets a bit of colour on the wrong part of their painting they can easily go over it. So does that mean that painting is "lesser" art compared to sculpture because it is easier to correct mistakes? Is music less of an art form because you can just do another take if someone messes up during recording? Or cinema?
Is diamond cutting now the pinnacle of art since not only can you not correct mistakes but you also cannot start again if you are working with a gemstone of extreme rarity (such as a massive natural diamond of very high purity and clarity)?
Karol wrote: tell me in which of the e sports, can you get an injury that ends your career on the spot, and maybe ends up with you ending crippled or dead? Because I do wrestling, that is a real sport, which to train I go to a sports school. e-sports, even with their training, teams etc don't come even close.
As I said, my grandfather worked as a restaurator of churchs. If he or someone on his team did an error, this could mean 2-3 months of work down the drain, or sometimes a priceless artefact being for ever destroyed. It is uncomperable to someone being able to fix an error with an undo button.
In any e-sport where you use your hands carpal tunnel can literally end your career in an instant. Obviously they aren't contact sports like wrestling but neither are golf, darts, pool, archery, or shooting and those are still considered a sport.
You are also aware that people still do have to produce physical parts to make repairs. Using CAD software to plan everything in detail and 3D printing/milling machines to craft the planned part is also just smart. There's no advantage to losing months of work over a simple mistake when you have the tools to avoid it.
So they are different. Just like playing fight and real MMA matchs or bare knuckle fighting for money is. I don't like how everything suddenly become just like other things. e-sports are not sports, there is no where near the same level injury. And carpal tunnel can be fixed with surgery. If I blow my knee cap, or break my disk, then it is game over, no amout of surgery can save me. Plus they can drug themselfs out of the wazzo, to get calm and focused as much as they like. If I over do it with supplements, I can get kicked out of school, and it is always going to be my foult, no matter that get good marks each semester you have to show the trainers the recip efor the supplements he tells you to take. And I do wrestling it is no where near the stuff, people that do cycling or tennis have to go through.
I don't know in what kind of c ountry does golf or darts count as a sport, or pool also. No school runs it here. I mean may as well claim chess and poker is a sport too.
Karol wrote: ...or break my disk, then it is game over, no amout of surgery can save me.
Not true. Kurt Angle won gold at the 1996 Olympics with 2 fractured vertebrae and 2 herniated discs in his neck. He was also going to try out for the 2012 Olympic team but couldn't due to a knee injury.
Because "sports events" are attached to huge marketing and advertising profits the term has become a bit of a catch all for "competitive events". Hence the evolution of terms like "esports" and such.
It's harmless though. It's just showing that the event has a competitive end to things and that there's a formal or semi-formal competing system being setup.
Also Darts, Pool, Golf, Tennis, Badminton, Table Tennis, they are ALL sporting events that are regularly shown on UK television on various channels.
Remember folks. There is no darkness without light.
A glimmer of hope here and there makes the struggle seem worth fighting. Its still absolute hell. But each faction has some spark of hope worth fighting for.
Karol wrote: So they are different. Just like playing fight and real MMA matchs or bare knuckle fighting for money is. I don't like how everything suddenly become just like other things. e-sports are not sports, there is no where near the same level injury. And carpal tunnel can be fixed with surgery. If I blow my knee cap, or break my disk, then it is game over, no amout of surgery can save me. Plus they can drug themselfs out of the wazzo, to get calm and focused as much as they like. If I over do it with supplements, I can get kicked out of school, and it is always going to be my foult, no matter that get good marks each semester you have to show the trainers the recip efor the supplements he tells you to take. And I do wrestling it is no where near the stuff, people that do cycling or tennis have to go through.
I don't know in what kind of c ountry does golf or darts count as a sport, or pool also. No school runs it here. I mean may as well claim chess and poker is a sport too.
Please source your claim for drug use in e-sports.
Also, golf is literally an Olympic sport as is ice dancing and target shooting. Poland does participate in the Olympics does it not? Or do the Olympics contain non-sporting events now?
Dai wrote: Cripes, I agree with Karol again. When it comes to sports definition anyway.
I'd agree, but not for the logic that the difference is that you can get "more hurt" with "sports" than non sports. Although its an interesting metric to consider, though it would probably put something like horse eventing WAY ahead of a lot of regular sports.
Dai wrote: Cripes, I agree with Karol again. When it comes to sports definition anyway.
I'd agree, but not for the logic that the difference is that you can get "more hurt" with "sports" than non sports. Although its an interesting metric to consider, though it would probably put something like horse eventing WAY ahead of a lot of regular sports.
They probably are sports by strict definition, I just want the kids to get off the computers and go outside sometimes!
Dai wrote: Cripes, I agree with Karol again. When it comes to sports definition anyway.
I'd agree, but not for the logic that the difference is that you can get "more hurt" with "sports" than non sports. Although its an interesting metric to consider, though it would probably put something like horse eventing WAY ahead of a lot of regular sports.
They probably are sports by strict definition, I just want the kids to get off the computers and go outside sometimes!
(So I can have a go on the console)
I personally draw the line at poker being a sport. In e-sports there is still an active physical component and muscle memory and mechanical skill are needed to even have a shot at playing pro. Teams are all investing in everything from dieticians to personal trainers for their players to get an edge over other teams.
Dai wrote: Cripes, I agree with Karol again. When it comes to sports definition anyway.
I'd agree, but not for the logic that the difference is that you can get "more hurt" with "sports" than non sports. Although its an interesting metric to consider, though it would probably put something like horse eventing WAY ahead of a lot of regular sports.
They probably are sports by strict definition, I just want the kids to get off the computers and go outside sometimes!
(So I can have a go on the console)
I personally draw the line at poker being a sport. In e-sports there is still an active physical component and muscle memory and mechanical skill are needed to even have a shot at playing pro. Teams are all investing in everything from dieticians to personal trainers for their players to get an edge over other teams.
What's even more ridiculous about professional poker is poker tournaments allowing stuff like sunglasses. The "skill" in poker is meant to be the ability to bluff and mask your reactions. A large part of that is in the eyes. Being allowed to hide them is just taking that away meaning that anyone who doesn't full on grimace or shake has basically the same "skill" as anyone else.
mrFickle wrote: Do you think GW is trying to make the 40k universe a bit less dystopian? It always will be but I feel like they are trying to make it less grim and dark. The tau robots and battle suits have always looked a bit too utopian to me, probably bars on the other places you see this kinds of designs. The new primaris models, whilst being excellent, feel a bit GI joe in the 41st century. Now we’re getting Bandai action figures and all sorts of stuff. Are the slowly re engineering the setting in a attempt to appeal to..... happier people?
In my personal opinion, the answer is no. The grimdark is still there in spades.
However, I do get the impression that some aspects are being "sanitized" (for want of a better term) in the interests of marketing.
However, I do get the impression that some aspects are being "sanitized" (for want of a better term) in the interests of marketing.
Except for the fact people were complaining about the 'kiddifying' of GW for as long as I've been on this board, which was right around the transition of 3rd to 4th edition, and one of the old, long discarded setting details from my old, floppy, 'White Dwarf Presents: Warhammer 40,000" is the section on Imperial Robots, whose fluff states, 'During the Horus Heresy, both sides made heavy use of robots in order to limit human casualties.'
That also had the rules for determining vehicle move distance by calculating the arc of the turn if your tank didn't move in a straight line.
However, I do get the impression that some aspects are being "sanitized" (for want of a better term) in the interests of marketing.
Except for the fact people were complaining about the 'kiddifying' of GW for as long as I've been on this board, which was right around the transition of 3rd to 4th edition, and one of the old, long discarded setting details from my old, floppy, 'White Dwarf Presents: Warhammer 40,000" is the section on Imperial Robots, whose fluff states, 'During the Horus Heresy, both sides made heavy use of robots in order to limit human casualties.'
That also had the rules for determining vehicle move distance by calculating the arc of the turn if your tank didn't move in a straight line.
"Now what you're going to have to do is use the tangent - are you listening jimmy? - multiply the tangent of the turn arc from the central hub of the tank to the sidemost edge corner of the front track module..."
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
Ummm... programming? Cinematography involving CGI. Ok.. anything not requiring a machine? Look, facts are that tech saves labor. Sure using tech involves skill. As much? I argue no. As transferable into other domains irl not requiring a specific tech? I argue no.
You don't think you can learn programming doing CGI? Authoring shaders, scripting tools, building animation rigs? Those are either programming adjacent or directly programming, depending on your tools/what you're doing.
Doing CGI can mean you're working the camera to render the scene/animation, you're going to be doing lighting, composition, considering camera movement etc. Those will be directly applicable to using a camera of any type, as well as traditional image-making where you might also be trying to evoke a mood or tell a story. Oftentimes the tech will allow you to iterate on composition/lighting/etc. faster, so you might learn more than you would with traditional drawing in less amount of time.
Tech saves some labor, tech also creates whole new branches of labor.
Saying tech doesn't involve as much skill as art is total BS. Both disciplines will take all the skill you put into them and will keep going. It's easier to do some things in one medium easier than the other, but that cuts both ways. To really do CGI or drawing/painting/sculpting well takes huge amounts of effort and practice.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Yeah, this whole "only physical art is TRUE artistry" mindset is incredibly reductive.
I ain't sure about that, because it is followed by claims like people playing League of Legends being sports men, and stuff like that.
E-sports are also sports.
I don't care if it's digital only, skill is skill. If I composed and performed purely through digital instruments, through MIDI and suchlike, would my music be less valid than someone who did the same work on pen and paper?
If my grand dad made an error durning scultping it could be 3 months of work down the drain. Someone working on digitial just clicks undo. They are not the same thing, but I don't doubt that people who do digital or e-sports love to think that they are doing the real thing.
Someone who plays a wrong note can just play a new one. An actor who misses his cue can come on the next, or reshoot. A painter can paint over an errant brush stroke.
Would you call dance a sport? Ballet, street, jazz and suchlike? Just curious.
A Town Called Malus wrote:What does ease of correcting mistakes have to do with whether something is art?
If a painter gets a bit of colour on the wrong part of their painting they can easily go over it. So does that mean that painting is "lesser" art compared to sculpture because it is easier to correct mistakes? Is music less of an art form because you can just do another take if someone messes up during recording? Or cinema?
Is diamond cutting now the pinnacle of art since not only can you not correct mistakes but you also cannot start again if you are working with a gemstone of extreme rarity (such as a massive natural diamond of very high purity and clarity)?
QFT - reducing art to "lesser" forms because they have a greater margin of error is ridiculously insulting.
Karol wrote:I don't know in what kind of c ountry does golf or darts count as a sport, or pool also.
Britain does. Not to mention golf is recognised by the Olympics as a sport.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
Ummm... programming? Cinematography involving CGI. Ok.. anything not requiring a machine? Look, facts are that tech saves labor. Sure using tech involves skill. As much? I argue no. As transferable into other domains irl not requiring a specific tech? I argue no.
You don't think you can learn programming doing CGI? Authoring shaders, scripting tools, building animation rigs? Those are either programming adjacent or directly programming, depending on your tools/what you're doing.
Doing CGI can mean you're working the camera to render the scene/animation, you're going to be doing lighting, composition, considering camera movement etc. Those will be directly applicable to using a camera of any type, as well as traditional image-making where you might also be trying to evoke a mood or tell a story. Oftentimes the tech will allow you to iterate on composition/lighting/etc. faster, so you might learn more than you would with traditional drawing in less amount of time.
Tech saves some labor, tech also creates whole new branches of labor.
Saying tech doesn't involve as much skill as art is total BS. Both disciplines will take all the skill you put into them and will keep going. It's easier to do some things in one medium easier than the other, but that cuts both ways. To really do CGI or drawing/painting/sculpting well takes huge amounts of effort and practice.
Yeah. And i see all that in the new computer art in the codices... yup. And still if the power goes put the cad guy is done for the day. Finally i maintain my position.
Consider horses vs cars. Keeping a horse to use for transport. Caring for the horse. Understanding the horse. That translates into empathic skills. Communication skills. Balance. Fitness. Life. Need and anticipation. Translates to all living thimgs. Cars? Sure. Machines of some sorts... painting? Media. Dry times. Brush materials. Base coats. Layers. Transparency. Flow. Blending. Much of this is simulated in computers. But computer interfaces ignore a lot too. Computers can erase. Delete. Transform. Redo endlessly. Many physical limitations disappear. It is easier for these reasons. And skills are trapped in computer land. More difficult to generalize.
jeff white wrote: One results in lasting skills that translate across media.
One does not.
CGI definitely gives the artists lasting skills that translate across media. I may not be the biggest fan of the overuse of CGI in recent years, but it is definitely a skill.
The difficulty is when CGI is used to substitute for skill. Movies that think they don't need a plot, or good acting, or dialogue, just so long as they have high-resolution explosions. Video games that insist on ever-more-elaborate methods of rendering dirty brown stuff is a substitute for gameplay, plot, or visual design. That kind of thing.
Those decisions often have precious little to do with the actual practitioner of the CGI implementation though. So not really the same. Good CGI still requires design, proportion, color, composition, lighting etc, which are all transferable skills to other disciplines like cinematography, illustration, etc. Often programming skills as well, depending on what you're doing.
Ummm... programming? Cinematography involving CGI. Ok.. anything not requiring a machine? Look, facts are that tech saves labor. Sure using tech involves skill. As much? I argue no. As transferable into other domains irl not requiring a specific tech? I argue no.
You don't think you can learn programming doing CGI? Authoring shaders, scripting tools, building animation rigs? Those are either programming adjacent or directly programming, depending on your tools/what you're doing.
Doing CGI can mean you're working the camera to render the scene/animation, you're going to be doing lighting, composition, considering camera movement etc. Those will be directly applicable to using a camera of any type, as well as traditional image-making where you might also be trying to evoke a mood or tell a story. Oftentimes the tech will allow you to iterate on composition/lighting/etc. faster, so you might learn more than you would with traditional drawing in less amount of time.
Tech saves some labor, tech also creates whole new branches of labor.
Saying tech doesn't involve as much skill as art is total BS. Both disciplines will take all the skill you put into them and will keep going. It's easier to do some things in one medium easier than the other, but that cuts both ways. To really do CGI or drawing/painting/sculpting well takes huge amounts of effort and practice.
Yeah. And i see all that in the new computer art in the codices... yup. And still if the power goes put the cad guy is done for the day. Finally i maintain my position.
Consider horses vs cars. Keeping a horse to use for transport. Caring for the horse. Understanding the horse. That translates into empathic skills. Communication skills. Balance. Fitness. Life. Need and anticipation. Translates to all living thimgs. Cars? Sure. Machines of some sorts... painting? Media. Dry times. Brush materials. Base coats. Layers. Transparency. Flow. Blending. Much of this is simulated in computers. But computer interfaces ignore a lot too. Computers can erase. Delete. Transform. Redo endlessly. Many physical limitations disappear. It is easier for these reasons. And skills are trapped in computer land. More difficult to generalize.
The art in the codecies has zero to do with this. And what does a horse even have to do with anything?
Lacking physical limitations doesnt mean there arent limitations. Learn about how to squeeze fidelity out of your art so it works in a 3d game compatable on a phone from 5 years ago, or loads quickly in a browser using HTML5. Learn how to light effectively within the limitations of your engine. Author procedural landscape generators and coax out a chain for building a realistic environments to spec. Or through lack of limitations, learn how to keep discipline about camera movement so you can maintain effective immersion in your scene.
CG tools are just another set of tools, with their own pitfalls, limitations, techniques and paths to mastery.
Heck, if you want to impress me with "easy 3d skillz" try sculpting a nice jagged rock using Zbrush or similar tool, and then render it out with a nice shader. I'm not joking. Sculpt a rock, and then tell me your process.
I don't think they are trying. I think they are just reflecting the times. The 80s lent to punk sci fi because of feared mutual destruction. It's been back and forth. Pop culture does this. I think Games Workshop is just taking itself less seriously and smartly expanding in different markets. I do think that the Primaris thing is too divergent though and breaks the lore (unless it turns out to be an alien ruse). Sorry, I see it as bad lore to sell cool models-just unnecessary.
Eadartri wrote: I don't think they are trying. I think they are just reflecting the times. The 80s lent to punk sci fi because of feared mutual destruction. It's been back and forth. Pop culture does this. I think Games Workshop is just taking itself less seriously and smartly expanding in different markets. I do think that the Primaris thing is too divergent though and breaks the lore (unless it turns out to be an alien ruse). Sorry, I see it as bad lore to sell cool models-just unnecessary.
And people don't fear that right now? I guess it depends how far from specific countries you live.
GW have been desperate to remove as much grimdark as possible from 40k and even AoS. The squatting of Slaanesh in AoS which was only reversed due to fan backlash is the prime example.
GW have been desperate to remove as much grimdark as possible from 40k and even AoS. The squatting of Slaanesh in AoS which was only reversed due to fan backlash is the prime example.
I know it’s a forum and everyone’s hot take is their opinion, but posts like this one really need a IMO prefix.
Primaris are miniatures even if that makes you salty, sorry.
Grimdark is here to stay. Plenty of it in miniatures and the lore. Must try harder. ;-)
GW have been desperate to remove as much grimdark as possible from 40k and even AoS. The squatting of Slaanesh in AoS which was only reversed due to fan backlash is the prime example.
Slaanesh was mentioned in nearly every chaos-related book from the beginning of AoS. I'd hardly call that "squatting".
imo, if grim dark is only defined by hopelessness, then maybe gw is moving away. I think the glimmer of hope offered by guilliman is less about moving away from grim dark and more about introducing a narrative element that can allow the introduction of new models. The situation is still hopeless. If anything, it's sadder because there's a new champion bashing his head against the wall trying to save it. It's not going to work. Mankind is beseiged and declining. Chaos is stronger than ever. The best case scenario might be to return things to how they were before rg came back.
Now, if the emperor gets revived, all the primarchs get rediscovered, the eye of terror closes, the tyrannids stop coming, the necrons go to sleep, and the Inquisition disbands, maybe we can stop calling the game grim dark.
BaconCatBug wrote:Primaris are toys, not miniatures.
By all logical aspects, they're identical to every other miniature released.
Unless you're calling all GW models "toys", this is in no way a factual statement, beyond your opinion.
They do describe themselves as a games/toy company on Facebook.
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with GW models being toys. I'm saying that calling some of them "toys" and others "miniatures" is purely a matter of subjective opinion, and isn't objective at all.
BaconCatBug wrote: The squatting of Slaanesh in AoS which was only reversed due to fan backlash is the prime example.
Absolute rubbish.
The delay for the slaanesh rules/minis was entirely due to the extensive redesign of the greater daemon model and related models.
Nothing to do with any alleged fan backlash.
Agreed. For some reason the new Slaanesh demon was more delayed than the others, but Slaanesh was always part of the AoS story. Even with the God entrapped there was still multiple stories of demons and demonettes at war across the Realms. If anything Slaanesh forces were more active with their leader imprisoned.
Slaanesh just isn't Khorne who got the lions share of attention in the early AoS days as the main/first antagonist against Stormcast.
Heck I wouldn't be surprised if there's a nice Slaanesh Mortals update somewhere on the cards down the line. Certainly at present Slaanesh is the only Chaos force in AoS without a strong mortal force of warriors and leaders; leaving ample room for a big expansion there.
BaconCatBug wrote: The squatting of Slaanesh in AoS which was only reversed due to fan backlash is the prime example.
Absolute rubbish.
The delay for the slaanesh rules/minis was entirely due to the extensive redesign of the greater daemon model and related models.
Nothing to do with any alleged fan backlash.
A convenient excuse. Why do you think the redesign was delayed? Because they had no plans to redesign them in the first place and had to scrabble to do so after the backlash.
It's good that GW actually listened to their customers for once though, so that's nice.
Again, Mr. RAW, nearly every chaos-related story from the beginning of AoS featured Slaaneshi forces. If GW planned on removing Slaanesh, their books sure did a poor job of it.
It's also not like GW products take years of effort in planning, design and pre-production before they're released, without even going to details like release slots and faction priorities...
Slaanesh is and has been just fine and dandy, no conspiracies needed. Other products simply preceded their release for a time.
For a defender so adamant about whats written, as the ultimate facts about something, BCB, you surely love to take thin air and make "proven truths" out of it.
You have literally 0 proof of what you are saying about Slaanesh, and just looking at how GW operates proves the absurdity of your premise.
I'm not surprised, tought, you are nothing more than a slighly more intelligent troll.
Karol wrote: I am confused, what do breasts have to do with something being grim or dark?
There are conspiracy mongers who insist GW is "sanitizing" their stuff or making it "kid friendly", including the false claim of removal of Slaanesh as the excessive god of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. Noting that boobies haven't gone out of the picture is an example of how GW hasn't dropped all "mature" things out of their imagery by a long shot.
Karol wrote: I am confused, what do breasts have to do with something being grim or dark?
There are conspiracy mongers who insist GW is "sanitizing" their stuff or making it "kid friendly", including the false claim of removal of Slaanesh as the excessive god of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. Noting that boobies haven't gone out of the picture is an example of how GW hasn't dropped all "mature" things out of their imagery by a long shot.
I'm unfamiliar with much of the fantasy line these days, but I can certainly recall a lot of "boobage" circa 3rd and 4th ed. The Diaz Daemonettes and a certain Slaneshi champion riding a boobsnake come to mind.
Ah, okey I guess. Maybe sports made less exited by mechanics of human bodies. If anything over use of breasts would point out at being juvenile. Mature stuff for me is stuff like politics cometary, be it real, historical or futurology. Or pondering the nature of men, and their fate. World building that is something else then bolter porn.
Karol wrote: I am confused, what do breasts have to do with something being grim or dark?
There are conspiracy mongers who insist GW is "sanitizing" their stuff or making it "kid friendly", including the false claim of removal of Slaanesh as the excessive god of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. Noting that boobies haven't gone out of the picture is an example of how GW hasn't dropped all "mature" things out of their imagery by a long shot.
I'm unfamiliar with much of the fantasy line these days, but I can certainly recall a lot of "boobage" circa 3rd and 4th ed. The Diaz Daemonettes and a certain Slaneshi champion riding a boobsnake come to mind.
Same ol', same ol'.
Slaanesh hasn't gone anywhere, the dark elf line has flesh showing just as much as before and life goes on. GW simply isn't doing everything at once nor at times some fans expect them to and they had to wait a bit longer, that is all there is to it.
Also, Karol, you're right about that juvenility. Warhammer has quite a bit of overt heavy metal / punk aesthetic in it, including some nudity with more or less tackt in places, which is often a go-to in these tirades about how all was cooler in days gone by.
Galas wrote: Their tail is basically a giant penis.
You're going to have to explain that one - probably with diagrams. Because as far as my anatomical understanding goes, its not really the right shape for that..... at all.
Galas wrote: Their tail is basically a giant penis.
You're going to have to explain that one - probably with diagrams. Because as far as my anatomical understanding goes, its not really the right shape for that..... at all.
Notice how the back legs are inversed. From where does the tail come out?
Karol wrote: I am confused, what do breasts have to do with something being grim or dark?
There are conspiracy mongers who insist GW is "sanitizing" their stuff or making it "kid friendly", including the false claim of removal of Slaanesh as the excessive god of sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. Noting that boobies haven't gone out of the picture is an example of how GW hasn't dropped all "mature" things out of their imagery by a long shot.
I'm unfamiliar with much of the fantasy line these days, but I can certainly recall a lot of "boobage" circa 3rd and 4th ed. The Diaz Daemonettes and a certain Slaneshi champion riding a boobsnake come to mind.
Same ol', same ol'.
Slaanesh hasn't gone anywhere, the dark elf line has flesh showing just as much as before and life goes on. GW simply isn't doing everything at once nor at times some fans expect them to and they had to wait a bit longer, that is all there is to it.
Also, Karol, you're right about that juvenility. Warhammer has quite a bit of overt heavy metal / punk aesthetic in it, including some nudity with more or less tackt in places, which is often a go-to in these tirades about how all was cooler in days gone by.
Haha, I forgot Fiend boobage. I remembered they were rad models and then my brain blanked about details.
I'm not mad! The choice to make those legs (Very humanoid legs even if the claws aren't) inverted and have the tail come out of THAT place was 100% intentional!
I don’t feel that GW has been sanitizing, so much as moving things to ‘more heroic’ from the Imperium’s perspective. There is still a lot in their novels, and in some models that I try to avoid exposing my son to. Most of that is themes, some imagery, but the models have definitely been changing (Repentia, Daemonettes), though even the latter still have some elements remaining.
It felt more wide open back in 2nd ed, when it was a smaller studio, and they weren’t trying for mass market, but it hasn’t shifted all that much.
From the get go, Slaanesh being gimp napped was at the hands of the Elven Pantheon.
As the background continued to unfold, we found out more about the why. In short? Slaanesh was forced to regurgitate the Elven souls consumed during the demise of The Old World, which were then crafted into new Elven races.
Seriously. A single ridiculous claim by Bell of Lost Souls does not truth make.
Karol wrote: Makes sense US is a much bigger market. Although I do not envy anyone who has to make stuff for people in the US, the social regulations on what you can or can not do seems to be a minefield.
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
Karol wrote: Makes sense US is a much bigger market. Although I do not envy anyone who has to make stuff for people in the US, the social regulations on what you can or can not do seems to be a minefield.
Right, unlike Poland. See any Gorgoroth concerts lately?
3 Polish shows on their last tour (2017).
Good to hear the country has advanced bravely into the 90s.
In fairness the start of AoS did see GW ditch the pretty newly revamped Tombkings model line; and Bretonnia as well as a chunk of other crazy stuff going on. So losing Slaanesh in AoS was always on the cards, just like any other army at that stage.
Of course Slaanesh was in the lore; and Slaanesh is one of the four who cross over both games so that's double the protection.
I'm surprised this is still going on. They are going down a path of softer public face and I really think you'll see that increase in time. To be more main stream they have to tone things down and being mainstream is exactly what they want.
That said, I'd say they will stay forever grim dark, as all their hatred and all their malice is poured directly into their prices. Just look at them, Grim Dark as Heck.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I'm surprised this is still going on. They are going down a path of softer public face and I really think you'll see that increase in time. To be more main stream they have to tone things down and being mainstream is exactly what they want.
That said, I'd say they will stay forever grim dark, as all their hatred and all their malice is poured directly into their prices. Just look at them, Grim Dark as Heck.
Rest in pieces eldar Players .
Rest in pieces of unbought and unopened banshees kits.
Jokes aside their recent proved have climbed to a point where it is cheaper for me to Import high quality resin and okay tarrifs in top of Transport then gw models at my flgs.
As for grimdark, i feel Like gw Knows they can't tone down too much.
), it's just an uninspired copy and paste.
