GW wrote:One of the 41st Millennium’s most famed warriors, Marneus Calgar is a champion of Humanity whose legacy goes right back to the earliest days of Rogue Trader. He’s a paragon of what makes a Space Marine a Space Marine, though his origins have always remained a mystery – until now. This new comic series will, at last, tell the origin story of this exemplar of the Adeptus Astartes, even going back as far as his time as a child on Nova Thulium.
I tell ya what, they had better fething mention me!
I looked up the artists and they seem solid, i also hope it goes well but im not a fan of the art style of the cover, hope it doesn't carry in the comic.
RandomRubric wrote: I looked up the artists and they seem solid, i also hope it goes well but im not a fan of the art style of the cover, hope it doesn't carry in the comic.
Erm, not the character I would have chosen to start with. Probably shouldn't have been a known character in the first place. Too much existing baggage. Not a fan of the cartoony art style either. Would prefer detailed black and white. But I'm an old indy comic and gw guy so that's just me. Definitely wouldn't be the modern Marvel style.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Erm, not the character I would have chosen to start with. Probably shouldn't have been a known character in the first place. Too much existing baggage. Not a fan of the cartoony art style either. Would prefer detailed black and white. But I'm an old indy comic and gw guy so that's just me. Definitely wouldn't be the modern Marvel style.
I gotta disagree. Choosing a known character is a better starting point as there's less to mess up with for what can be overall established events and stories. That's why for the live action thing using Eisenhorn is a smart move.
We've had those for a long time though. Look at the that odd Deathwatch comic we got. And the Dark Angels vs Iron Warriors vs Grey Knights + Inquisition comic. And before that, we had that Empire comic series, which tied in with the Witch Hunter comics.
Also, this isn't the first 40k Marvel thing. Remember all those plagiarized 40k stuff that one guy ripped off? He didn't even think to change the Tau symbol on the vehicle This was a smart move by Marvel. Now when you google 40k Marvel, this comic will pop up, not that plagiarism stuff
Pri-Marneus Calgar looks a bit off though. His head seems too far back
I didn't know side effects of the primarisizing of Oldstartes included microcephaly and neck elongation.
Spoiler:
That is some gakky artwork for the first issue cover where you'd think they'd want to make the best impression possible. They should have gotten on of the artists who do the codex covers or this freelance artist.
No, the art style is what you'd expect for Transformers or a super hero comic, not 40K.
Look, GW have made great efforts to deliver a book range that wouldn't feel out of place in the historical warfare, Tolkien or Shakespeare sections at Waterstones, and I don't see it here.
SamusDrake wrote: No, the art style is what you'd expect for Transformers or a super hero comic, not 40K.
Look, GW have made great efforts to deliver a book range that wouldn't feel out of place in the historical warfare, Tolkien or Shakespeare sections at Waterstones, and I don't see it here.
Yeah, no. Glad I put my glass down, because a spittake would have been unavoidable.
This is exactly what I expect from a 40k/Marvel collab.
Well, OK, from the cover I also expect a guest-crossover with Cable, just so we can be confused about who is who, but this is 40k. It is superheroes, and Transformers honestly make more logical sense than the setting we're working with, and they barely make any sense.
...you probably should have stayed in the cryocapsule at least six months more, you have chosen the year poorly
He's talking about Marvel actually producing comic books. Both DC's and Marvel's comic book divisions are now making only a tiny fraction of the company's profits. It's an insanely low number, something like 8-11% or something. Comic book shops are closing at an alarming rate.
And still, it has done nothing but grow since it almost went bankrupt last century.
It is a lost opportunity, though; they should have partnered up with IDW. That way they could have had crossovers with Transformers, G.I. Joe, Power Rangers, Mask, TMNT, Terminator... feth, they could have had a crossover with Sonic the Hedgehog!
warboss wrote: I didn't know side effects of the primarisizing of Oldstartes included microcephaly and neck elongation.
Spoiler:
That is some gakky artwork for the first issue cover where you'd think they'd want to make the best impression possible. They should have gotten on of the artists who do the codex covers or this freelance artist.
they could have had a crossover with Sonic the Hedgehog!
Flashgits have already done that with the Black Templars...
I think their pink Hello Kitty marine parodies will be more grimdark than anything Marvel will give us.
That's not to say that I'm against more family friendly comics in the 40k universe but rather that I'd want them in addition to a more indy authentic take. YMMV.
Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Spoilers for all who care
Spoiler:
The Necron not only kill people, they manage to destroy the entire planet.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Spoilers for all who care
Spoiler:
The Necron not only kill people, they manage to destroy the entire planet.
A note that Hunger Games is also young adult literature, and features murder for sport as its primary plot point.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Spoilers for all who care
Spoiler:
The Necron not only kill people, they manage to destroy the entire planet.
A note that Hunger Games is also young adult literature, and features murder for sport as its primary plot point.
Hunger Games is for teenagers. Not sure if Warhammer Adventures is in that same category.
Elbows wrote:He's talking about Marvel actually producing comic books. Both DC's and Marvel's comic book divisions are now making only a tiny fraction of the company's profits. It's an insanely low number, something like 8-11% or something. Comic book shops are closing at an alarming rate.
Yeah, that.
Albertorius wrote:And still, it has done nothing but grow since it almost went bankrupt last century.
It is a lost opportunity, though; they should have partnered up with IDW.
Yanno that Marvel Studios is a separate thing, right? That Marvel Comics farm out their characters to IDW now?
JohnnyHell wrote:But I’ve no use for a Bolter porn comic anyway. GW has never done particularly good comics.
I've been looking through the old Warhammer Monthly comics recently. Nostalgia goggles weren't enough to disguise the fact that barring a few gems (Titan, Darkblade, Kal Jerico etc.) you're right.
There's another topic in itself - what happened to those characters after the sudden chop.
Elbows wrote: He's talking about Marvel actually producing comic books. Both DC's and Marvel's comic book divisions are now making only a tiny fraction of the company's profits. It's an insanely low number, something like 8-11% or something. Comic book shops are closing at an alarming rate.
Marvel movies are making so much money by reusing the most popular characters and storyline from comics that they can just keep publishing comics at a loss, and consider that R&D/market research, I guess.
Elbows wrote: He's talking about Marvel actually producing comic books. Both DC's and Marvel's comic book divisions are now making only a tiny fraction of the company's profits. It's an insanely low number, something like 8-11% or something. Comic book shops are closing at an alarming rate.
Marvel movies are making so much money by reusing the most popular characters and storyline from comics that they can just keep publishing comics at a loss, and consider that R&D/market research, I guess.
it's possiable marvel considers this 40k forey an experiment to test how popular 40k is, if the comics do well disney could well take a look at the IP more seriously for other material.
The garish colours on the cover makes them look like minis from the early nineties. I would be surprised if Calgar was actually standing on a circle of bright green flock.
...you probably should have stayed in the cryocapsule at least six months more, you have chosen the year poorly
He's talking about Marvel actually producing comic books. Both DC's and Marvel's comic book divisions are now making only a tiny fraction of the company's profits. It's an insanely low number, something like 8-11% or something. Comic book shops are closing at an alarming rate.
And still, it has done nothing but grow since it almost went bankrupt last century.
It is a lost opportunity, though; they should have partnered up with IDW. That way they could have had crossovers with Transformers, G.I. Joe, Power Rangers, Mask, TMNT, Terminator... feth, they could have had a crossover with Sonic the Hedgehog!
Power Rangers is done by Boom, not IDW. Incidentally, Boom was the previous 40K license holder, so that crossover actually used to be on the table.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Spoilers for all who care
Spoiler:
The Necron not only kill people, they manage to destroy the entire planet.
Although it's also worth noting that the trail of devastation left in the wake of our pre-teen protagonists has almost no effect on them at all, other than one scene where Talen was a tad sad for a bit.
Any normal human would be psychologically ruined by a fraction of what they've cheerfully passed through.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well then we need to discuss what's considered "kid friendly". Didn't they actually kill characters in the Adventure series via Necrons? Doesn't seem kid friendly there entirely.
Spoilers for all who care
Spoiler:
The Necron not only kill people, they manage to destroy the entire planet.
Although it's also worth noting that the trail of devastation left in the wake of our pre-teen protagonists has almost no effect on them at all, other than one scene where Talen was a tad sad for a bit.
Any normal human would be psychologically ruined by a fraction of what they've cheerfully passed through.
It's the 41st Millennium and they're too young to process it correctly perhaps. Hard to say how preteens would react to those events in today's age, but in 40k that's just another month of Mayhem.
Grot 6 wrote: Marvel is dying... they have to grab at any straws anyone throws at them at this point.
if you think marvel took up the 40k franchise because they figured it might save their comics publishing you're nuts.
They took it because they need anything, literally anything that might turn even the most tiny of profits, having spent the last decade destroying the American comic book industry.
EnTyme wrote: Right? I mean, it's not like Marvel Studios just spent the last decade and a half making literally all the money at the box office.
You do realise they are separate companies, right? Just because they are both owned by the same parent company (Disney), doesn't magically make the Comic division profitable because the Movie division is raking in the cash.
In the corporate world, that's what's known as "creative accounting". One brand is split up into multiple "corporations" in such a way that one makes a profit and the other operates at a loss. The company that operates at a loss subsidizes the tax burden of the profitable entity. You can't seriously think that Marvel Studios and Marvel Comics are separate to anyone but the IRS?
EnTyme wrote: In the corporate world, that's what's known as "creative accounting". One brand is split up into multiple "corporations" in such a way that one makes a profit and the other operates at a loss. The company that operates at a loss subsidizes the tax burden of the profitable entity. You can't seriously think that Marvel Studios and Marvel Comics are separate to anyone but the IRS?
Given the fact that one company has almost single-handedly destroyed an entire industry, while the other has printed money with the most safe and generic films you can imagine, yes, I think they have different people calling the shots.
BaconCatBug wrote: Given the fact that one company has almost single-handedly destroyed an entire industry . . .
Oh, I can't wait to hear this. Though since you tried to link to Arch Warhammer earlier, I can probably predict why you think it was Marvel that "destroyed" the comic book industry.
I really think Salamanders would have been a much better choice. That would let the artists be able to create really neat art with their ornately crafted weapons, use of fire/scales, and that they actually care about the people of their homeworld making it easier to show the human/post-human stuggles and ideas of how the Astartes view regular humans.
That cover just looks so generic right now, besides people already a fan of 40k, don't really imagine somebody seeing that and thinking it is cool.
NH Gunsmith wrote: I really think Salamanders would have been a much better choice. That would let the artists be able to create really neat art with their ornately crafted weapons, use of fire/scales, and that they actually care about the people of their homeworld making it easier to show the human/post-human stuggles and ideas of how the Astartes view regular humans.
That cover just looks so generic right now, besides people already a fan of 40k, don't really imagine somebody seeing that and thinking it is cool.
I'm not the biggest Ultramarine fan, but they are portrayed as working well with their human auxiliary and caring about them. Not the same as Salamanders of course, but they're not as aloof as a lot of chapters.
It'll be funny if this series generates some new fans for Marneus who find out after a quick search that he's out of action for having one of his hearts ripped out.
Maybe split the tangent about the dying comic book industry into Off Topic or Geek Media? I’m pretty sure that there’s entertainment value to be had there, but I don’t want this thread locked until we get some blurry potato-cam pics of truly Liefeldian interior artwork.
ArcaneHorror wrote: It'll be funny if this series generates some new fans for Marneus who find out after a quick search that he's out of action for having one of his hearts ripped out.
You think he's been put out of action perminatly? he just got an expensive new model, GW's not going to bench him forever
ArcaneHorror wrote: It'll be funny if this series generates some new fans for Marneus who find out after a quick search that he's out of action for having one of his hearts ripped out.
You think he's been put out of action perminatly? he just got an expensive new model, GW's not going to bench him forever
Not permanently, but as of the moment, that's the reality of the situation. I'm sure it'll change soon.
Kayback wrote:Eh, the sun still shines in the future.
BaconCatBug wrote: Given the fact that one company has almost single-handedly destroyed an entire industry . . .
Oh, I can't wait to hear this. Though since you tried to link to Arch Warhammer earlier, I can probably predict why you think it was Marvel that "destroyed" the comic book industry.
They made products no-one wanted, did not hire the best writers and/or artists, and told the people who actually bought their product that they were bad people by virtue of immutable characteristics, which meant they stopped buying their product.
Yeah, I'm sure DC's 52 Crises on Infinite Crisis had nothing to do with that.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It's amazing what a coat of Nuln Oil can do for a miniature:
Nah, the right one is too dark for Marvel
You think Marvel is bright and cheery? When Hydra wiped a city off the map, and heroes were searching for survivors, it was the teen group who found the airport intact and got hopeful, only to discover the planes had been microwaved full of passengers. There were no survivors.
More likely, that photoshop doth covers many sins. There are much gakkier illustrators over there making a living just by obscuring the pencils with lots of gak.
Whoever did that photoshop was so concerned with the dark they let it obscure the grim. A smoking-gaping chest wound sure seems "grimdark" to me, but you can barely see it with all the cheap filters applied to the second image. It looks like a coffee drinker threw up on the picture.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It's amazing what a coat of Nuln Oil can do for a miniature:
as if I needed more confirmation that I didn't like their recent style...like night and day...jebus
this isn't GW's style though this is marvel.
They didn't specify whose style they were referring to did they.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
EnTyme wrote: Whoever did that photoshop was so concerned with the dark they let it obscure the grim. A smoking-gaping chest wound sure seems "grimdark" to me, but you can barely see it with all the cheap filters applied to the second image. It looks like a coffee drinker threw up on the picture.
Im not really concerned with the art until we see the inside.
Covers dont always portray the story within, and often, it's meant to grab the attention. Aren't they usually pretty bright and colorful, even for the dark stuff?
My only hope is that they don't retcon Marneus's most humiliating 'drawn and quartered via Swarmlord'. I want to see a nice full art page of it please.
Honestly, much as I prefer the photoshopped cover floating around, the actual Marvel cover doesn't strike me as all that bad, rather it looks very 2E. It doesn't look like it'd be out of place next to any of the covert art on any book from 2nd edition. For a comic book, that seems pretty spot on. There have been goofier 40k comic covers.
H.B.M.C. wrote: See what? That it looks like the 40K we're used to?
That the direct comparison could be used as an example on a 1D4chan page; that it is what 40K is generally presented as, but also what makes it faintly ridiculous; that it looks like the cheap old 'night for day' effect from cinema; that it does looks like someone puked coffee or spilled nuln oil over it; that a superficial photoshop filter somehow makes the art good; that as Carnikang says, people are close to judging the book differently by a cover it doesn't even have, that isn't going to make any difference to how the contents suck, or on the offchance, how they don't.
Here's two codex covers, direct from GW, featuring the same thing as the comic cover:
Spoiler:
It's a question that's appropriate to comics: what makes the big shiny space marine in primary colours 'better' and 'more 40K' after someone wipes a used teabag over it?
People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
O_o
40k was already the dominant tabletop miniatures game & IP with plenty of popularity by the time 3E rolled around, with books, videogames, etc well established during 2E. Most of the art in both 2E and 3E was still done by the same people.
Likewise, there was plenty of Grimdark in RT and 2E stuff as well, and having goofy cartoony art doesn't prevent stuff from also being grimdark in its own way (e.g. the Heavy Metal movie that so much of 40k imagery is based on). Ascribing 40's popularity to "grimark" alone, and particularly only post 3E stuff, seems rather odd.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
O_o
40k was already the dominant tabletop miniatures game & IP with plenty of popularity by the time 3E rolled around, with books, videogames, etc well established during 2E. Most of the art in both 2E and 3E was still done by the same people.
Likewise, there was plenty of Grimdark in RT and 2E stuff as well, and having goofy cartoony art doesn't prevent stuff from also being grimdark in its own way (e.g. the Heavy Metal movie that so much of 40k imagery is based on). Ascribing 40's popularity to "grimark" alone, and particularly only post 3E stuff, seems rather odd.
Don't tell them. For many people the only good 40k is the flavour of it they enjoy most.
H.B.M.C. wrote: See what? That it looks like the 40K we're used to?
That the direct comparison could be used as an example on a 1D4chan page; that it is what 40K is generally presented as, but also what makes it faintly ridiculous; that it looks like the cheap old 'night for day' effect from cinema; that it does looks like someone puked coffee or spilled nuln oil over it; that a superficial photoshop filter somehow makes the art good; that as Carnikang says, people are close to judging the book differently by a cover it doesn't even have, that isn't going to make any difference to how the contents suck, or on the offchance, how they don't.
Here's two codex covers, direct from GW, featuring the same thing as the comic cover:
Spoiler:
It's a question that's appropriate to comics: what makes the big shiny space marine in primary colours 'better' and 'more 40K' after someone wipes a used teabag over it?
They you for voicing my view of the situation in a way I couldn't quite put into words without resulting to insults. I kept trying to say pretty much exactly this, but every time I tried, it seemed like it would devolve into petty name calling, so I gave up trying to post it. Well done.
I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
Why did they go to Marvel, again?
I think people are forgetting something.
these comics proably aren't being made for us
if GW wanted to make comics for us they could continue to do small BL stuff etc. the marvel deal is an attempt to extend the reach of 40k, aiming at typical comic books fans, hence it uses tradtional 3 colour colours etc
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
2nd wasn’t popular? What utter nonsense.
Was 3rd edition less popular (i.e. worse selling) in your area? That would be surprising if true. GW has never published to my knowledge sales figures of each edition but, judging from GW store openings and online interest, 3rd definitely exploded in popularity. I personally got into the game during that time as well and my local group expanded within a year or two from three guys who would meet to play at the FLGS every week or two to a dozen that had to be split into twice weekly 40k days due to space/table limitations. YMMV.
For a less personalized take on the question, here's a link to the poll set up on dakka years ago. The poll is obviously outdated as it is from almost 10 years ago but since we're talking about 20-30 year old editions the data is still relevant. Out of 1800+ respondants, 3rd edition brought in almost 60% more players than 2nd.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
2nd wasn’t popular? What utter nonsense.
It was the early 90s. Things like Dungeons and Dragons, 40k, and even PC gaming were not popular. I know it's hard to imagine a world where "nerd" interests were not mainstream, but I can assure you it did exist.
It's a question that's appropriate to comics: what makes the big shiny space marine in primary colours 'better' and 'more 40K' after someone wipes a used teabag over it?
I don't know. If I did, I'd be a better artist. But I don't, so I keep using brown inks on my miniatures without having a clue why it makes them better looking in my eye.
No big deals, we can't all be good at this, my mini looks fine enough on a tabletop ^^.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
2nd wasn’t popular? What utter nonsense.
Was 3rd edition less popular (i.e. worse selling) in your area? That would be surprising if true. GW has never published to my knowledge sales figures of each edition but, judging from GW store openings and online interest, 3rd definitely exploded in popularity. I personally got into the game during that time as well and my local group expanded within a year or two from three guys who would meet to play at the FLGS every week or two to a dozen that had to be split into twice weekly 40k days due to space/table limitations. YMMV.
His assertion wasn't that 3rd was less popular, it was that 2nd was popular.
While I'd agree with the sentiment regarding newer 40k art in general looking like far too much was done on computers and will always be a Blanche/England/etc fan, I think people are focusing a wee bit too much on missing a layer of sepia wash on a comic book cover. Put this next to half the Eldar codex covers, the 2E box art, etc, I think it's fine, I think if anything it's flaw is in reproducing the Primaris models too faithfully and not making them a little bit cartoonier in proportions to fit the color style, but that may also be something GW insists on to use the IP.
A two second google search turns up a number of other 40k comic covers easily just as goofy or worse, even if not all quite as visually bright.
Spoiler:
The intern CG'd this in the last 5 minutes before printing!
Generic 80's fantasy cover pose!
Wolfguard with Wolfpelt and Wolfteeth Wolfstalking Obliviously
I think it's safe to say that this is not the worst expression of 40k's art.
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
2nd wasn’t popular? What utter nonsense.
It was the early 90s. Things like Dungeons and Dragons, 40k, and even PC gaming were not popular. I know it's hard to imagine a world where "nerd" interests were not mainstream, but I can assure you it did exist.
If this is the line we're going with, and comparing it to RPG's and stuff like PC gaming, I think tying 40k's popularity to post-2E Grimdarkness is absolutely nonsensical, because 40k's popularity has tracked pretty well with these other things, and none have anything to do with being grimdark. 40k's popularity rose along in the same way scifi/fantasy pop culture in general did over the last 30 years. 40k has always had some level of cartooniness to it along with the grimdark, and I don't think the Marneus Calgar comic cover is out of place at all among the greater plethora of 40k art and IP.
Not talking about popularity, but 40k definitely had a strong visual identity. It always had...although it seems to have been watered down somewhat before the beginning of the primaris era.
Like it or not, the color palette was part of the visual identity (in representational 40k art).
BaconCatBug wrote: People need to realise something when trying to claim 2nd edition style is fine.
40k was not popular in 2nd edition. I was basically a spin-off of WHFB in SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE! It became a lot more popular post 3rd edition following the grimdarkening. 40k is popular BECAUSE it's grimdark.
2nd wasn’t popular? What utter nonsense.
Was 3rd edition less popular (i.e. worse selling) in your area? That would be surprising if true. GW has never published to my knowledge sales figures of each edition but, judging from GW store openings and online interest, 3rd definitely exploded in popularity. I personally got into the game during that time as well and my local group expanded within a year or two from three guys who would meet to play at the FLGS every week or two to a dozen that had to be split into twice weekly 40k days due to space/table limitations. YMMV.
For a less personalized take on the question, here's a link to the poll set up on dakka years ago. The poll is obviously outdated as it is from almost 10 years ago but since we're talking about 20-30 year old editions the data is still relevant. Out of 1800+ respondants, 3rd edition brought in almost 60% more players than 2nd.
Here in Spain it didn't really change much. 40k always played second fiddle to WFB. If anything, the advent of The Lord of the Rings made it even less popular.
Here in Spain it didn't really change much. 40k always played second fiddle to WFB. If anything, the advent of The Lord of the Rings made it even less popular.
Fair enough. Which edition did you start with btw? At least for me, locally, WFB was more popular until 40k 3rd and then the latter took over. LOTR gained a dedicated and passionate small fanbase that seemed equal parts primarily"home" gamers used to using more eclectic historical and fantasy fanbases and a portion of the store WFB regulars.
Here in Spain it didn't really change much. 40k always played second fiddle to WFB. If anything, the advent of The Lord of the Rings made it even less popular.
Fair enough. Which edition did you start with btw? At least for me, locally, WFB was more popular until 40k 3rd and then the latter took over. LOTR gained a dedicated and passionate small fanbase that seemed equal parts primarily"home" gamers used to using more eclectic historical and fantasy fanbases and a portion of the store WFB regulars.
I started with WFB 3rd and Rogue Trader myself ^^
Over here 40k only really surpassed WFB when GW killed it.
Yeah, Spain was a kind of an odd ball. Here WFB was always the biggest game of GW. Thats why they did even special edition miniatures of the Lustria Campaing for spain and everything.
But for one reason or the other they abandoned all continental europe.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
Why did they go to Marvel, again?
By Black Library comics, do you mean the old Inferno and Warhammer Monthly stuff(90's-'05), the Boom! Studio licensed books('06-'14), or the Titan Comics licensed books('15- '19)?
They went with Marvel because it's a more mainstream brand.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
Why did they go to Marvel, again?
Comics aren't very profitable, especially not these days. Marvel's comic department has been haemorrhaging money for years despite the MCU, arguably, making their brand as popular as it's ever been.
In GW's case it's more about brand awareness/advertising. Stick Marvel on the side and you've got an air of legitimacy about it that might tempt readers of comics to look up what this whole Warhammer malark is. Like how Warhammer Adventures is less about making money off the books and more providing another avenue for dads to awkwardly try and get their kids interested in their plastic addiction than dragging them to the local GW and pointing at colourful boxes.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
Why did they go to Marvel, again?
Comics aren't very profitable, especially not these days. Marvel's comic department has been haemorrhaging money for years despite the MCU, arguably, making their brand as popular as it's ever been.
In GW's case it's more about brand awareness/advertising. Stick Marvel on the side and you've got an air of legitimacy about it that might tempt readers of comics to look up what this whole Warhammer malark is. Like how Warhammer Adventures is less about making money off the books and more providing another avenue for dads to awkwardly try and get their kids interested in their plastic addiction than dragging them to the local GW and pointing at colourful boxes.
Interesting... care to share your sources? Because mine say that while single issues of printed comics has decreased by 20% in the last 20 years, comic book companies have tripled their market size through trade paperback sales, digital sales and increasing prices.
That would point to exactly the opposite of "not being very profitable".
According to ComicChron, which has statistics going back to the 60s, since 1997 year-to-year sales of comics have more than doubled.
In 1997 the estimated size of the market was $300-320 million, today it is $780 million, and that doesn't count digital sales which are exploding. In 2014 digital sales were $540.38 million.
If you do the math that's $1.320 billion last year, which is four times what the comic industry was making nearly 20 years ago.
And they're talking about comic sales, there, mind. Not revenues from licensing.
That said, it is true that sales have gone down a bit since 2017.
Albertorius wrote: even though just the digital sales are almost twice all the comics market at the turn of the century. Ignore it is.
Where do you get the digital sales info? I'm not aware of anyone who publishes the information although admittedly I follow the subject peripherally.
All sales data is coming from Comichron, both physical and digital.
I wasn't aware that they published monthly data on digital. I've only seen that referenced in year reviews in passing. Are the exact sales figures per issue behind a paywall or did I miss it?
Albertorius wrote: even though just the digital sales are almost twice all the comics market at the turn of the century. Ignore it is.
Where do you get the digital sales info? I'm not aware of anyone who publishes the information although admittedly I follow the subject peripherally.
All sales data is coming from Comichron, both physical and digital.
I wasn't aware that they published monthly data on digital. I've only seen that referenced in year reviews in passing. Are the exact sales figures per issue behind a paywall or did I miss it?
Most come from ICV, so I don't think so, but digital sales seem to include all digital sources (meaning it's not only digital comics but Amazon and stuff, I think).
That said, that's only US sales. The rest of the world also buys comics
Biggest problem there is that you're assuming it was "for a quick buck and as a middle finger to their fanbases".
I'm only peripherally into comics(most of my purchases are trades or the "Klaus" stories from Boom! comics), but even I was aware that what you were describing was part of a built-up arc.
Hell, the Thor stuff is supposed to be part of the next movie if I remember right. It wasn't just "ermahgerdladythor!" or "ermahgerdladyironman!". They were different characters, effectively, taking up the mantles of heroes that existed.
Hey all, lets keep the topic on Marvel and Marneus Calgar, I've removed a whole bunch of politics/identity posts & responses that really have nothing to do with Calgar's story being told by Marvel. It also really doesn't help when people drop controversial language and bunch of links and then say "oh don't respond to this"
Art styles aside I'm about burned out on HH and other novels. I wouldn't mind some literal mind candy to rot my brain with, even if the demographic they are shooting for is the YA group. I've probably read worse.
Albertorius wrote: That said, that's only US sales. The rest of the world also buys comics
I'm curious about how this reflect on US comic books though. I may be biased, because my country is apparently the second biggest consumer of manga (the first being, of course, Japan), but here it's Manga >> Franco-Belgian bande dessinée >>> Comics.
Albertorius wrote: That said, that's only US sales. The rest of the world also buys comics
I'm curious about how this reflect on US comic books though. I may be biased, because my country is apparently the second biggest consumer of manga (the first being, of course, Japan), but here it's Manga >> Franco-Belgian bande dessinée >>> Comics.
France is a bigger comic market than either the US or Japan. However France's comic industry leans more heavily towards adult/young adult Fantasy and Sci-Fi rather than children's superhero comics.
Albertorius wrote: That said, that's only US sales. The rest of the world also buys comics
I'm curious about how this reflect on US comic books though. I may be biased, because my country is apparently the second biggest consumer of manga (the first being, of course, Japan), but here it's Manga >> Franco-Belgian bande dessinée >>> Comics.
Here manga is really big too, but I feel that in general we're a bit more eclectic: we read everything and anything.
I think there’s a huge split here between comic fans who are more accepting of styles and looks, knowing from many comic lines what things look like, and then 40k fans who don’t (as much or at all) delve into the comic world).
Then people riling for no reason, with the will they be in mcu, or marvel games etc (which is all irrelevant as this is marvels comic arm, no deal with any other part of marvel (or should we say Disney) at all).
If there were we would see those shows being produced by one of Disney’s arms.
Potentially, particularly to those in industries of media, they know that the big things are coming in the film and tv, cartoons, and big promotion for 40k to mainstream.
They want to get the comic line in now as popularity will soar, and if they already have the comics, and several released, it would see a big surge in sales there too..
BaconCatBug wrote: France is a bigger comic market than either the US or Japan. However France's comic industry leans more heavily towards adult/young adult Fantasy and Sci-Fi rather than children's superhero comics.
In your analysis, do you make the distinction between comics, bande dessinées and manga? It's really considered differently here, and things that are staples of the US comic book industry just don't translate over to bande dessinées. The usual bande dessinée is released directly as a hardback, with a creator-owned IP, and no shared universe. This makes for something very different from the shared-universe, corporate owned IP of comics. As far as I know, manga is somewhat in between comics and bande dessinée in this regard. They have less shared universe than comics, and series usually don't get multiple writers and illustrators, but they have a more serial release style, and a bit more corporate control over how a series develop than bande dessinée.
"They are the iconic Space Marines. So, let's show what they look like. Because only by showing you what they look like can you understand why other chapters like the Space Wolves are different".
That makes a lot of sense actually. Also I don't know this person. Are they good at story writing?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: "They are the iconic Space Marines. So, let's show what they look like. Because only by showing you what they look like can you understand why other chapters like the Space Wolves are different".
That makes a lot of sense actually. Also I don't know this person. Are they good at story writing?
Gillen? Yes, he's a great writer and a high profile get for GW.
He created Doctor Aphra for Star Wars, wrote a bunch of good Marvel books, and created Phonogram and The Wicked and The Divine.
I can only speak to his Darth Vader series for Marvel. I grew up with SW, but it’s mostly just another spectacle to me these past few years.
But I really enjoyed his work on Darth Vader, after hearing great things about it. Now that I know he’s the guy writing this 40K series, I’ll actually check it out.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: "They are the iconic Space Marines. So, let's show what they look like. Because only by showing you what they look like can you understand why other chapters like the Space Wolves are different".
That makes a lot of sense actually. Also I don't know this person. Are they good at story writing?
Gillen? Yes, he's a great writer and a high profile get for GW.
He created Doctor Aphra for Star Wars, wrote a bunch of good Marvel books, and created Phonogram and The Wicked and The Divine.
He's also doing "Once and Future" with Dan Mora for Boom--which is a great lil' company and a really cool concept with a great artist.
I like the black and white shots they show. They look good.
The interview itself speaks volumes about how much he's bringing to this project as a creator.
Some optimism for this comic, even if there is yet to be a confirmed full-color page of Swarmlord ripping Marneus apart during the invasion of Macragge....
"So, it's a horror universe, but it's also a satirical and action universe. The people who take Warhammer a bit too straight clearly are working on the weird assumption they would be Space Marines when it's clear that if any of us were in the 40K universe we would be someone who was bombarded from orbit to clear out a rabid infection running through the tiny human population. It's so operatically, grim."
Gillen is good. And a 40K fan. From his newsletter:
I also suspect it’s not a surprise to many people that I’m launching this. I’m told when it was mentioned they had the licence at the Marvel Summit, the room basically went “So Kieron, right?” My brand is remains my brand.
Marneus Calgar is our entry way into the world of 40k. My inspiration is very much Batman Year One. As in, do a book which works both as an introduction to a character and a world while also absolutely hitting the notes a fan of the world would like to see. If you’ve always wanted to know more about 40k, this is a place to join us. If you always wanted to see how a power fist turns people into mist, this is also the place to join us.
Necros wrote: Next thing ya know there's gonna be genestealers in Guardians of the Galaxy 3
You'd think that would be a good idea but Marvel is the worst when it comes to power scaling in their movies and comics, so they wouldn't even really appear as a threat.
Necros wrote: Next thing ya know there's gonna be genestealers in Guardians of the Galaxy 3
You'd think that would be a good idea but Marvel is the worst when it comes to power scaling in their movies and comics, so they wouldn't even really appear as a threat.
Necros wrote: Next thing ya know there's gonna be genestealers in Guardians of the Galaxy 3
You'd think that would be a good idea but Marvel is the worst when it comes to power scaling in their movies and comics, so they wouldn't even really appear as a threat.
The average viewer would see a 4 armed alien and just assume they were a different color of the Outriders from Infinity War. Maybe the base species since so many fans are convinced the ones Thanos used had Symbiotes on.
Necros wrote: Next thing ya know there's gonna be genestealers in Guardians of the Galaxy 3
You'd think that would be a good idea but Marvel is the worst when it comes to power scaling in their movies and comics, so they wouldn't even really appear as a threat.
The average viewer would see a 4 armed alien and just assume they were a different color of the Outriders from Infinity War. Maybe the base species since so many fans are convinced the ones Thanos used had Symbiotes on.
Albertorius wrote: even though just the digital sales are almost twice all the comics market at the turn of the century. Ignore it is.
Comichron states that estimated overall sales in 2000, a significant dip in the market, were $255-275 million. It also states that digital sales in 2019 were $90 million. Top 300 floppy sales (significant majority of overall floppy sales) in 2018 were put at $390 million. At the start of 2020, Bleeding Cool didn't think digital sales were much cop and something needed done.
I think you might need to see an optician.
Apropos of nothing, total units of the top 300 floppies shifted by Diamond in 2019 were 8% higher than in those 2000 doldrums, compared to a roughly 67% increase in dollar sales across a similar period (to 2018). More money paid for not much more product? I'd have to check if that's adjusted for inflation.
Total North American comic market in 2019 was $1.2 billion. It's marched to that high while Diamond distribution to comic shops (i.e. Marvel and DC's bread-and-butter) have been wavering back and forth for the last seven years. Something is driving that growth, and I don't think it's Marvel's few thousand copies a month. Wonder what it might be...?
Was there an original topic? Yeah. GW might be a rising star these days but it's still a fairly obscure brand. Marvel couldn't shift more of it's comics when Robert Downey Jr. was wowing cinemagoers a decade or more ago, and I still feel the ache during rainy weather, from when GW axed the comic that it couldn't sell to it's own audience. This tie-in fairly reeks of desperation on Marvel's part. I don't think Keiron Gillen is going to save it.
Albertorius wrote: even though just the digital sales are almost twice all the comics market at the turn of the century. Ignore it is.
Comichron states that estimated overall sales in 2000, a significant dip in the market, were $255-275 million. It also states that digital sales in 2019 were $90 million. Top 300 floppy sales (significant majority of overall floppy sales) in 2018 were put at $390 million. At the start of 2020, Bleeding Cool didn't think digital sales were much cop and something needed done.
I think you might need to see an optician.
Go first, maybe? Also, if you're already answering to a month and a half+ old post, maybe go to the start? Maybe that way you'll see I was talking digital sales, not digital comic sales. Meaning, online sales.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I have to admit, the photoshopped version looks...if not better, a lot more like Warhammer 40k than the original version to me. Warhammer will always look like the paintings of Blanche, Kopinski, Smith, England and Dainton, as far as I’m concerned. The modern era of GW art looks wrong, and so does this comic book cover. Not bad, just wrong for Warhammer 40k.
But also bad. The central focus of the illustration is the guy with the worst proportions and perspective errors.
The art is honestly not up to the quality of GW's level, that's for sure. The photoshopped cuts, and the digital stuff is lazy looking...
What happened to Black Library's own comic book lines, anyway?
Why did they go to Marvel, again?
Comics aren't very profitable, especially not these days. Marvel's comic department has been haemorrhaging money for years despite the MCU, arguably, making their brand as popular as it's ever been.
In GW's case it's more about brand awareness/advertising. Stick Marvel on the side and you've got an air of legitimacy about it that might tempt readers of comics to look up what this whole Warhammer malark is. Like how Warhammer Adventures is less about making money off the books and more providing another avenue for dads to awkwardly try and get their kids interested in their plastic addiction than dragging them to the local GW and pointing at colourful boxes.
Interesting... care to share your sources? Because mine say that while single issues of printed comics has decreased by 20% in the last 20 years, comic book companies have tripled their market size through trade paperback sales, digital sales and increasing prices.
That would point to exactly the opposite of "not being very profitable".
According to ComicChron, which has statistics going back to the 60s, since 1997 year-to-year sales of comics have more than doubled.
In 1997 the estimated size of the market was $300-320 million, today it is $780 million, and that doesn't count digital sales which are exploding. In 2014 digital sales were $540.38 million.
If you do the math that's $1.320 billion last year, which is four times what the comic industry was making nearly 20 years ago.
And they're talking about comic sales, there, mind. Not revenues from licensing.
That said, it is true that sales have gone down a bit since 2017.
Of course, the context of the phrase you quoted got lost due to a bunch of post being deleted, included the one it was answering to. But keep on keeping on.
When C and I got married, this is how we named our tables. #WarhammerCommunity
(She had a veto on any which sounded too murderous, so no Mortarion and chums.)
and before we all go off..
Spoiler:
"Omeron"?
Kieron Gillen
@kierongillen
·
54m
My typing is TERRIBLE constant badthoughts
@allwrongthink
·
53m
"But that means this table isn't the REAL Alpharius.. which means..."
Kieron Gillen
@kierongillen
·
52m
I forget if I was smart enough to actually throw shade by who was placed on what table.
.
