tneva82 wrote: And screenshots won't come easily it looks like. App has anti screenshot feature
Curiously the PC player has no DRM at all. A little bit of stream obfuscation using transport stream but it's trivially downloadable.
(FWIW there's not an "anti screenshot" feature, so much as the app turns on secure surfaces to try and prevent screen recording, which is very common for subscription video apps. But if you block the OS's access to the video feed to block screen recording the OS can't see it to do a screenshot. Still, that does seem a little bit of a waste of time when you're sending unencrypted mp4s to Chrome for Windows.).
On the subject of lipsync that was raised a page or so back by Mad Doc - I wonder if it was caused by the animation being made before the audio? The lips are clearly made for english speaking lip sync, but the slight out of alignment might mean that the audio was recorded after (when normally its done before and then animation put to it).
Who knows it might be one of the "corona delay/issue" things from last year or perhaps GW signed some far better voice actors late and swapped the audio over?
Edit - also (and this is from others as I don't use the app) if you signed up to the 40K app and paid this month, when you upgrade to Warhammer+ the system refunds you your Warhammer 40K app charge for this month.
tneva82 wrote: And screenshots won't come easily it looks like. App has anti screenshot feature
Curiously the PC player has no DRM at all. A little bit of stream obfuscation using transport stream but it's trivially downloadable..
GW doesn't tend to use DRM from what I've seen. Their Black Library books bought from BL are just a downloadable book, no system or DRM in place. You only get it if you buy from Amazon store and then its the standard Kindle DRM system.
The Phazer wrote: Not brilliant that the "top company" they've had working on this wasn't able to sort out an Android TV app for launch when there's a Fire TV app.
It's not quite zero porting required between the two, but it's not much in the grand scheme of things and it rather suggests a rushed, badly planned launch.
Did they ever reveal who the "top company" is? I wouldn't be surprised to learn its a middling but established company that nobody has ever actually heard of
No, but I'll figure it out within half an hour of the app going live.
So, whats your verdict?
It's Brightcove. Brightcove are very big in the online player market, but not very big in subscription video services because their content protection offerings generally are a bit clunky and uncompetitive if you want studio level DRM. So I guess if GW were telling the truth depends on your POV a bit.
Agreed, I understood your point quite clearly - I have to assume these guys are trolling you or intentionally mischaracterizing the nature of your point, otherwise their reading comprehension is awful. Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc. Instead it looks like a semi-industrial city. As someone else pointed out, its entirely possible that this represents the market square of a nearby village, the processing area of an industrial farm operation, or even an area of the planets capital, etc. So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like.
No, it's supposed to be the battle of Iax, which takes place in the capital city of an agriworld, and is documented in great detail in a novel that came out months ago - and the place the battle takes place looks pretty much like that board.
I can totally see why someone might not realise that, certainly not everyone is going to have read the book. And yes, "agriworld" does sound like you'd expect something else without that context. But what I can't understand is that when someone politely points that out the battle they're recreating happens in a city, the reaction isn't to go "oh fair enough, haven't read it," but to double down, to say that's bad reading comprehension or trolling, or to come up with conspiracy theories about how that's justification after the fact for using the gakky GW terrain boards, when the book was written a year ago.
The battle and its setting are described in great detail over 50 pages or so of Godblight. It doesn't take place on farmland. Might have been cool if it did, but it didn't.
There is no argument here, other than "a rural battle would have been cooler than an industrial one". People are inferring stuff about the setting from one word in the marketing copy when there's 20,000 words written that describe it in great detail. There's no need.
All well and good, doesn't really justify the immediate responses that Wha got. He didn't get "the battle takes place in the planetary capital", he got "how dare you judge this while its still unpainted, once its done it might be painted in dirt roads and look more rural".
chaos0xomega wrote: ]. Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc. Instead it looks like a semi-industrial city. As someone else pointed out, its entirely possible that this represents the market square of a nearby village, the processing area of an industrial farm operation, or even an area of the planets capital, etc. So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like.
Ah yes. Battle taking in capital city(as per fluff of battle. You HAVE read it right?) Looks like farm, forest etc...since when?
How many capitals in our world has barns and hay???
Really? Not even north korea or afganistan have such capitals.
You have weird ideas on what capital cities(you did of course know where story takes place since you critique. Surely you wouldn't do that without knowing fluff of battle in question) looks like.
Yeah, so your reading comprehension really is awful. Read what I wrote again and keep re-reading it until you understand why your reply is a non-sequitur and doesn't actually make sense in the context of what I wrote.
Racerguy180 wrote: Wow, 2 free months of something that isn't worth the free part....
Such wonderous times we live in.
So in order to get people to sign up they need:
£10 voucher
2 free months
Man the sheer value they've given everyone!
Well, if you want to break it down fiscally, I've bought a £10 voucher, pre-ordered a £25 mini and paid £15 for 12 months of animations, battle reports, painting guides, lore dives, a book back catalogue and access to (eventually) 2 army building apps.
The app won't broadcast to my roku, good thing I also have a few vizio tvs. The broadcast button is kinda bugged. I solved that by waiting 15 seconds of playing an episode before clicking on it.
Sad that all the hammer and bolter episodes has the same quality as old bale eye. Maybe it's quantity over quality? Angels of death series is amazing
Yeah, so your reading comprehension really is awful. Read what I wrote again and keep re-reading it until you understand why your reply is a non-sequitur and doesn't actually make sense in the context of what I wrote.
You claim battle should have barns and hays as it's on agriworld.
But got it. You haven't read, don't have any clue and are just on dishonest rant and now trying to cover up that you are talking crap.
Barnfields and farms indeed.
Next time read fluff of battle before critiquing battlefield. Maybe that way your writings might be 2 digit % in terms of making sense
Quoting you: Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc.
No it's not. Agriworld is big place which isn't uniform. It has stuff like capital cities etc. Board is supposed to look like it's described in novel.
Surely you aren't silly enough to think entire planet looks same? So desert planet has just dunes and that's it?
(hint. Desert planets would still generallw have greens and even seas. Planets aren"t uniform. That before adding in human built stuff like buildings)
Yeah, so your reading comprehension really is awful. Read what I wrote again and keep re-reading it until you understand why your reply is a non-sequitur and doesn't actually make sense in the context of what I wrote.
You claim battle should have barns and hays as it's on agriworld.
But got it. You haven't read, don't have any clue and are just on dishonest rant and now trying to cover up that you are talking crap.
Barnfields and farms indeed.
Next time read fluff of battle before critiquing battlefield. Maybe that way your writings might be 2 digit % in terms of making sense
gonna side with Tneva here. people looked at that and said "IT'S ON IAX AN AGRIWORLD BUT IT HAS AN INDUSTRUAL LOOK IT SUCKS!"
when anyone whose actually read the novel describing the battle in case knows that the battle was largely a siege of the planetary capital/space port.
Feels like the last 6 pages of argument could have been avoided if the article had simply stated something like "This battle report features a conflict between Guilliman and Mortarion, who faced off in climactic battle in the capital city of Iax, an Imperial agri-world."
Mr. Grey wrote: Feels like the last 6 pages of argument could have been avoided if the article had simply stated something like "This battle report features a conflict between Guilliman and Mortarion, who faced off in climactic battle in the capital city of Iax, an Imperial agri-world."
Like they wouldn’t have just found something else to argue about
It’s true the launch content is a bit thin. But I’ve enjoyed and appreciated everything on there.
And y’know, over a month? It’s like a live action copy of White Dwarf. Painting tutorials, animated short stories, battle reports. And once Loremasters debuts, some (hopefully) crunchy background stuff.
Can’t say I’m feeling short changed at the moment, but the mileage of others will vary.
Mr. Grey wrote: Feels like the last 6 pages of argument could have been avoided if the article had simply stated something like "This battle report features a conflict between Guilliman and Mortarion, who faced off in climactic battle in the capital city of Iax, an Imperial agri-world."
People going after each other is like half the fun of the Internet though.
I was and wasn't surprised with the amount of animation and battle report content that was on to start. I think they have been ambitious with how thin it is to be honest in reality, but I wasn't expecting much more.
What is slightly surprising is the likes of astartes etc not already being on there, that would have been an easy and quick win surely?
Anyway, it depends how much and the frequency they Intend to pump out per week, 2x episodes a week plus a battle report is the minimum standard we should get I would hope. If not, and it's more bi-weekly, well... I want a bloody exclusive mini on the level of the Vindicare every year as a bare minimum for my subscription.
Death's Hands was great though, I really enjoyed it, maybe some of the lore was being stretched, but it was still enjoyable and some of the lore insights within it were great.
It’s true the launch content is a bit thin. But I’ve enjoyed and appreciated everything on there.
And y’know, over a month? It’s like a live action copy of White Dwarf. Painting tutorials, animated short stories, battle reports. And once Loremasters debuts, some (hopefully) crunchy background stuff.
Can’t say I’m feeling short changed at the moment, but the mileage of others will vary.
I am actually looking forward to the Loremasters videos. I also agree that this feels like a White Dwarf streaming service, something I am quite happy with.
Yeah, so your reading comprehension really is awful. Read what I wrote again and keep re-reading it until you understand why your reply is a non-sequitur and doesn't actually make sense in the context of what I wrote.
You claim battle should have barns and hays as it's on agriworld.
But got it. You haven't read, don't have any clue and are just on dishonest rant and now trying to cover up that you are talking crap.
Barnfields and farms indeed.
Next time read fluff of battle before critiquing battlefield. Maybe that way your writings might be 2 digit % in terms of making sense
Quoting you: Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc.
No it's not. Agriworld is big place which isn't uniform. It has stuff like capital cities etc. Board is supposed to look like it's described in novel.
Surely you aren't silly enough to think entire planet looks same? So desert planet has just dunes and that's it?
(hint. Desert planets would still generallw have greens and even seas. Planets aren"t uniform. That before adding in human built stuff like buildings)
*eyeroll*
Try reading it again.
"Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc. Instead it looks like a semi-industrial city.""
I.E. This is me agreeing with Whamu that the board looks a-typical for an agriworld.
"As someone else pointed out, its entirely possible that this represents the market square of a nearby village, the processing area of an industrial farm operation, or even an area of the planets capital, etc. "
I.E. This is me pointing out, despite my agreement with Whamu and in agreement with another poster here, that even an agriworld will have areas that look like the board GW previewed.
"So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like."
I.E. This is me continuing to affirm what I said in the sentence prior, that even an agriworld will have urban areas that look like the board previewed.
Learn to read.
Honestly - its embarassing that you think I am on some "dishonest rant" (if you want to talk about a rant, try reading your own posts) and "trying to cover up" when what I said was clear as day and very much *not* what you thought it said.
The Phazer wrote: Not brilliant that the "top company" they've had working on this wasn't able to sort out an Android TV app for launch when there's a Fire TV app.
It's not quite zero porting required between the two, but it's not much in the grand scheme of things and it rather suggests a rushed, badly planned launch.
Did they ever reveal who the "top company" is? I wouldn't be surprised to learn its a middling but established company that nobody has ever actually heard of
No, but I'll figure it out within half an hour of the app going live.
So, whats your verdict?
It's Brightcove. Brightcove are very big in the online player market, but not very big in subscription video services because their content protection offerings generally are a bit clunky and uncompetitive if you want studio level DRM. So I guess if GW were telling the truth depends on your POV a bit.
Interesting! Never heard of them before, but it sounds like they are a bigger firm, just not necessarily one you would think for in the context of what GW is trying to do here.
Has anyone found any credits for the animated episodes? I almost feel like GW might be putting themselves up for legal case by omitting proper credits.
Subscribed for the first month just to see how it's like.
I didn't realize that Warhammer Visions was such a nice mag! Much prefer it to the current incarnation of White Dwarf. Pics only, and some really gorgeous models in every issue.
AoD seems decent enough.. when is Ep2 out?
I could see WH TV becoming a real "cable tv" channel, once they accumulate tons of content.. So at least in that sense, the name fits.
"So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like."
I.E. This is me continuing to affirm what I said in the sentence prior, that even an agriworld will have urban areas that look like the board previewed.
There's no "question" for it to be entirely in or out of. It's a battle documented in a book that takes place in an urban area, and by the time you posted that multiple people on the thread had told you that.
It *does* represent a scene from an agri world, and the battle does take place in an area atypical of what much of an agri-world looks like. There's no question to be had. Why still present it that way? Why "I might be wrong" and not just "I was wrong" ?
I mean I understand why, people don't want to lose an argument on the internet, but it's weird to keep bringing it up time and again and saying people didn't comprehend what you were saying, when you got it wrong. It's okay to be wrong. I thought the same thing as you did at first then connected what the battle was and checked the book.
I would be surprised to see creator credits on GW stuff. Not because of some silly "GW is evil and wants all the credit" thing but because the fanbase is incredibly toxic and has shown in the past that it can and will do illegal things to creators people deem "bad".
Talking the business side of Warhammer TV specifically.
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I'm not suggesting they couldn't have warhammer tv as well per say, but it does seem like a trick has been missed by blocking it all behind a paywall that only people aware of the hobby would ever subscribe to. There's strong rumours that the EPL (football/soccer league in the UK) will eventually have their own subscription service, ending their arrangements with sky/BT etc as there is just too much money left on the table still by partnering with them, that could go direct to the clubs if they had their own product, so GW will be the master of their own destinies and ability to accrue revenue from their IP, but still... It seems like a huge trick has been missed to bring more into the hobby.
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I think it's clear in case of WHTV GW prioritized getting more money out of existing customers over seeking new ones.
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I think it's clear in case of WHTV GW prioritized getting more money out of existing customers over seeking new ones.
This just looks like it's GW trying to make the money that people out in the community have been making by way of lore, painting, and "fan film" videos, and making it themselves. It wouldn't be so easy to criticize if it hadn't happened at the same time as another shift in their IP policy that appeared to be about freezing out those aforementioned fan films.
So they get to control to control the narrative of the content, they get the monetization of it, and they get another avenue of advertising for their body of products. As I've said before, this is basically white dwarf digital.
No joy at all in getting Warhammer tv to run on my laptop, just get a yellow ish ring going round for a bit then it gives up. Is this a Chrome issue or am I just missing what I am meant to do?
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I'm not suggesting they couldn't have warhammer tv as well per say, but it does seem like a trick has been missed by blocking it all behind a paywall that only people aware of the hobby would ever subscribe to. There's strong rumours that the EPL (football/soccer league in the UK) will eventually have their own subscription service, ending their arrangements with sky/BT etc as there is just too much money left on the table still by partnering with them, that could go direct to the clubs if they had their own product, so GW will be the master of their own destinies and ability to accrue revenue from their IP, but still... It seems like a huge trick has been missed to bring more into the hobby.
I think GW is perhaps not big enough for Netflix to care. Or for Netflix to care enough to want to make a show whilst being overseen by GW for lore and accuracy and such.
I'm sure that is one reason GW's video game licence tends to get picked up either by companies that really want to work with it (eg CA) or those who are much much smaller who essentially need the leg-up that the licence brings with it in terms of marketing and such.
I think video wise GW is in the same position as they were years ago with video games in that they aren't a TV company. They aren't in the media or videos or films enough to make them a known quantity. So right now they've the money and they've invested that into the kind of shows that we are seeing from Warhammer+. Perhaps with a view that they can grow their name, identity and chances in that market and that perhaps ni the future they can approach Netflix or Amazon and say "Hey we've got this big setting, big fanbase and they love our stuff and we'd like to work with you on producing a show " etc...
I think its one reason they've come down on paid/donated fan videos in the last months - just like they did for video games years ago. IT's not just a market GW is paying to be in; its a market GW might envision others paying them for the licence to work with. So they need a clean slate legally speaking
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: No joy at all in getting Warhammer tv to run on my laptop, just get a yellow ish ring going round for a bit then it gives up. Is this a Chrome issue or am I just missing what I am meant to do?
I ran into this and don't know if it is coincidence but...
I had subscribed to the app through the Apple store, on my iPhone, and had to upgrade my subscription through that. Once I upgraded, I was seeing the issue you saw (on Chrome). However, once I downloaded the Warhammer TV app on my iPhone and logged into that, Chrome seemed to automatically log me in (or just happened to succeed at that same time).
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I'm not suggesting they couldn't have warhammer tv as well per say, but it does seem like a trick has been missed by blocking it all behind a paywall that only people aware of the hobby would ever subscribe to. There's strong rumours that the EPL (football/soccer league in the UK) will eventually have their own subscription service, ending their arrangements with sky/BT etc as there is just too much money left on the table still by partnering with them, that could go direct to the clubs if they had their own product, so GW will be the master of their own destinies and ability to accrue revenue from their IP, but still... It seems like a huge trick has been missed to bring more into the hobby.
I think GW is perhaps not big enough for Netflix to care. Or for Netflix to care enough to want to make a show whilst being overseen by GW for lore and accuracy and such.
I'm sure that is one reason GW's video game licence tends to get picked up either by companies that really want to work with it (eg CA) or those who are much much smaller who essentially need the leg-up that the licence brings with it in terms of marketing and such.
I think video wise GW is in the same position as they were years ago with video games in that they aren't a TV company. They aren't in the media or videos or films enough to make them a known quantity. So right now they've the money and they've invested that into the kind of shows that we are seeing from Warhammer+. Perhaps with a view that they can grow their name, identity and chances in that market and that perhaps ni the future they can approach Netflix or Amazon and say "Hey we've got this big setting, big fanbase and they love our stuff and we'd like to work with you on producing a show " etc...
I think its one reason they've come down on paid/donated fan videos in the last months - just like they did for video games years ago. IT's not just a market GW is paying to be in; its a market GW might envision others paying them for the licence to work with. So they need a clean slate legally speaking
I get what you are saying, but on the other hand, have you seen what is in the Netflix and Amazon Prime catalogue? They'll take most things for a stint at least - I am aware this is more due to publishers/studios selling a license to Netflix etc or however it works, which is why there is a lot of trash on there but you get my point.
GW could take the hit to have one of the shows on there (and when I say take a hit, I mean not make as much money out of it as they potentially could on Warhammer+) as a means to get it out there a bit more. What will be super interesting is if TV/Streaming service critics and the like that aren't invested in GW like influencers within the fanbase start reviewing it etc.
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: No joy at all in getting Warhammer tv to run on my laptop, just get a yellow ish ring going round for a bit then it gives up. Is this a Chrome issue or am I just missing what I am meant to do?
I ran into this and don't know if it is coincidence but...
I had subscribed to the app through the Apple store, on my iPhone, and had to upgrade my subscription through that. Once I upgraded, I was seeing the issue you saw (on Chrome). However, once I downloaded the Warhammer TV app on my iPhone and logged into that, Chrome seemed to automatically log me in (or just happened to succeed at that same time).
It was odd, but this info may help you?
Cheers, I have not downloaded the app anywhere on my phone yet as I try to keep my phone relatively app free...but the laptop site does seem to be having real issues recognising that I am logged in as it is constantly asking me to log in when I already am.
Why put it on another streaming site and share your revenue when you’re the industry leader, with reference points entirely your own, and feel confident enough to claim all those lovely lovely fivers entirely to yourself?
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: No joy at all in getting Warhammer tv to run on my laptop, just get a yellow ish ring going round for a bit then it gives up. Is this a Chrome issue or am I just missing what I am meant to do?
I ran into this and don't know if it is coincidence but...
I had subscribed to the app through the Apple store, on my iPhone, and had to upgrade my subscription through that. Once I upgraded, I was seeing the issue you saw (on Chrome). However, once I downloaded the Warhammer TV app on my iPhone and logged into that, Chrome seemed to automatically log me in (or just happened to succeed at that same time).
It was odd, but this info may help you?
Cheers, I have not downloaded the app anywhere on my phone yet as I try to keep my phone relatively app free...but the laptop site does seem to be having real issues recognising that I am logged in as it is constantly asking me to log in when I already am.
Edit: That fixed it, cheers Rihgu.
Also had the same issue with chrome, despite subscribing using chrome. had to install firefox and it worked fine...
shadowsfm wrote: There's an app? On my android I been using the warhammertv website
The app is also called WarhammerTV. It lets you watch the shows but you still need to go to the dedicated site for the magazine and book content.
Ok got it. It still won't cast to roku, Only my vizio tvs. Do you think they will ever do more with the cinematic trailers, like turn them into feature length movies?
Alexonian wrote: I thought becoming a + member would give you full access to the app, which I thought meant unlocking all the codexes, seems that's not the case
Alexonian wrote: I thought becoming a + member would give you full access to the app, which I thought meant unlocking all the codexes, seems that's not the case
I was under the impression it unlocked the 8th edition codices & updates for free, but not for 9th.
"So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like."
I.E. This is me continuing to affirm what I said in the sentence prior, that even an agriworld will have urban areas that look like the board previewed.
There's no "question" for it to be entirely in or out of. It's a battle documented in a book that takes place in an urban area, and by the time you posted that multiple people on the thread had told you that.
It *does* represent a scene from an agri world, and the battle does take place in an area atypical of what much of an agri-world looks like. There's no question to be had. Why still present it that way? Why "I might be wrong" and not just "I was wrong" ?
I mean I understand why, people don't want to lose an argument on the internet, but it's weird to keep bringing it up time and again and saying people didn't comprehend what you were saying, when you got it wrong. It's okay to be wrong. I thought the same thing as you did at first then connected what the battle was and checked the book.
So your reading comprehension sucks too.
Or you're the exact type of "i don't want to lose an argument on the internet" type you're trying to paint me as.
Or you're confusing me for someone else ("and by the time you posted that multiple people on the thread had told you that" - point of fact, no they didn't. I only made one post on the topic after seeing people go after Wha-mu for irrelevant reasons. If people did point out that the book takes place in the city's capital by that point in the thread, they definitely were not directed at me, and I definitely didn't read them).
Or some/all of the above.
I didn't get anything wrong, because I never said that the table wasn't representative of an agri-world to begin with. Quite the opposite in fact. Even though I reiterated/agreed with Wha-mu's point that it doesn't match the stereotype of an agri-world - which people were attempting to misconstrue as being an issue of "paint" as opposed to "landscape", I very clearly pointed out that an agri-world is more than farms and fields. I.E. - I was telling off the people who were harassing Wha-mu (which is the first half of the paragraph, which wasn't quoted), while still pointing out that his actual point (i.e. the landscape was wrong) was still incorrect.
To clarify further, this is what Wha-mu originally posted on page 26:
Spoiler:
Also that's apparently supposed to take place on a "Rural Agri-World". Because when i think of a Rural planet filled with farms, what i picture is an empty industrial street with metal tiling, with generators, pipes, Churches and also random trenches. Look at it, there's not a single speck of dirt on that board!
This is the response he received to that post, also on page 26:
Spoiler:
Gert wrote: Yeah no dirt on an unpainted board. Weird that.
Uuh...you weather your models before painting? Seeing paint covers it and you need weather again...whajt's the point?
You DO realize it's wip shot right? Nobody can miss that surely?
Again typical to you everything gw does is bad no matter what.
yeah it's kinda absurd to complaina bout the board's colours given it's obvious it hasn't been painted yet.
These responses misconstrued, mischaracterized, and misrepresented wha-mu's point. His point was that he believed an agri-world should look rural and not industrialized or like a city, etc. His comment about a lack of dirt was meant to be humorous/hyperbolic and to point out that the entire board was supposed to be representative of an urban landscape devoid of anything approaching a plowed field or something you would expect in a rural landscape. In very understandable frustration, Wha-mu responded to this on page 26 with:
Spoiler:
And i find it kinda absurd how everyone completly misses my entire point.
That is what I was responding to when I made my post:
Spoiler:
Agreed, I understood your point quite clearly - I have to assume these guys are trolling you or intentionally mischaracterizing the nature of your point, otherwise their reading comprehension is awful. Its supposed to be an agri-world, i.e. open fields, barns, bales of hay, dilapidated wood/stone fences, cattle pens, etc. Instead it looks like a semi-industrial city. As someone else pointed out, its entirely possible that this represents the market square of a nearby village, the processing area of an industrial farm operation, or even an area of the planets capital, etc. So its not entirely out of the question that this does represent a scene from an agri-world, just not the "stereotype" of what you expect an agriworld to look like.
So again, the first part of that is reiterating what Wha-mu's point was in order to demonstrate that I understood his point and to elucidate what it was because he was being unfairly attacked by trolls that were making the argument about something other than what it was actually about (paint and weathering). The second part of that post is me pointing out to him the flaw in his argument, as was explained by Overread on page 26:
Spoiler:
Farming would have huge areas of open fields - huge farming machines (titanic sized ones) as well as huge areas of processing and such. This area is likely a more urban region of the agriworld; so likely near to its landing and processing plants.
That is the factories that process the food into material to be shipped off world; the stores; the offworld landing pads; the generators and reactors to power everything.
Basically just because its an agriworld dedicated to food production, doesn't mean it wouldn't have any rural regions. Though I do 100% get your point and its yes very clear that this is a story built around the limits of the boards that GW currently designs.
The third part of that post is me reinforcing Overreads point by stating that agri-worlds do in fact have more than farms on them and that an urban landscape is still possible on an agri-world despite his protest to the contrary.
At no point in this discussion was I ever "wrong", because my position in this discussion from the beginning has always been the same - that the board IS, in fact, representative of an agri-world.
At no point in this was I "told by multiple people" that the book describes the battle as taking place in a city. The book doesn't come up anywhere on page 26 at all. Thats essentially all I was responding to when I wrote my post. Whatever Godblight, or whatever the book is, says is irrelevant and immaterial. The book doesn't contradict anything that I said (rather, it reinforces it by agreeing that the agri-world in question has urbanized and industrialized areas). At the time I wrote my post, the last post on the board was Tokhuah's at the top of page 27 re: the Tarot. I'm posting from work so it took me a while to get it on there, which is why my post didn't actually appear until page 30 - a bunch of stuff I didn't read was posted in between typing this and posting it.
Reading forward from that last post about the Tarot, Kanluwen references lexicanum to determine that the planet in question has more than just farms and suggests that the novel might offer more details on where the battle takes place, but evidently hasn't read the book himself as he doesn't seem to be aware of the details. People continue arguing back and forth about whether an agri-world can have cities for another 2-3 pages that I mostly didn't read, with others basically taking the same stand as I did, such as H.B.M.C on page 28:
Spoiler:
I can't believe that three people in a row completely missed Wha's point about this city board looking nothing like what people might find on your typical agri-world. It's like you were trying to just have a go at him directly, so intentionally ignored what he said.
Poor form, all three of you.
Its not until the bottom of page 28 that someone (BrianDavion) actually explains that the book sets the battle in an urban area of the planet. Great, its still immaterial and irrelevant, because it doesn't contradict what I said, its not something I ever read, commented, or engaged with, and essentially makes no change in what my argument was (that people are donkey-caves and that wha-mu is still wrong despite that).
And then tneva82, one of the three aforementioned trolls, comes in later and completely misunderstands what I wrote and seems to think I'm arguing that wha-mu is right and that agri-worlds *cant* have cities:
Spoiler:
Ah yes. Battle taking in capital city(as per fluff of battle. You HAVE read it right?) Looks like farm, forest etc...since when?
How many capitals in our world has barns and hay???
Really? Not even north korea or afganistan have such capitals.
You have weird ideas on what capital cities(you did of course know where story takes place since you critique. Surely you wouldn't do that without knowing fluff of battle in question) looks like.
Which is where I start being a condescending ass to him because 1- Hes a troll and 2- Was completely and objectively wrong in his interpretation of my post, and the rest is history.
Racerguy180 wrote: Wow, 2 free months of something that isn't worth the free part....
Such wonderous times we live in.
So in order to get people to sign up they need:
£10 voucher
2 free months
Man the sheer value they've given everyone!
Well, if you want to break it down fiscally, I've bought a £10 voucher, pre-ordered a £25 mini and paid £15 for 12 months of animations, battle reports, painting guides, lore dives, a book back catalogue and access to (eventually) 2 army building apps.
I guess I value the non hobby components significantly less than others do. currently I pay 0 for battle reports, already have a Vindicare, don't need painting guides, and 0 for army apps. So for me at least it offers very little above the animations. I know I'm not the target demographic, but I was genuinely excited about it until they started killing fanime.
It's pure entertainment to read all the complaints on here. It literally costs less than a cup of coffee a month. If you dont like it, dont subscribe. Seems simple. I'll be subscribing because I love all things warhammer and it's cheap enough.
shadowsfm wrote: There's an app? On my android I been using the warhammertv website
The app is also called WarhammerTV. It lets you watch the shows but you still need to go to the dedicated site for the magazine and book content.
Ok got it. It still won't cast to roku, Only my vizio tvs. Do you think they will ever do more with the cinematic trailers, like turn them into feature length movies?
Oh I see, roku has its own app I had to download on the tv
Actually pleasantly surprised by how affordable this is in Japan - 700円 for a month??? You could actually almost buy something with the voucher??? Man, GW, did you actually... price something almost fairly out here for once? I'm impressed. Might check it out, but I'm put off by the stories of animation quality. Anyone know if the JP stuff has subtitles yet?
Wouldn't hammer and bolter, considering they're fairly accessible stories by the looks of things, without the need to know extensive knowledge of the lore to understand the premise, wouldn't GW have been best served licensing that out to Netflix etc to draw more people into the hobby still?
I very much doubt Netflix would have been interested tbh.
Certainly not on terms GW would have been willing to entertain. It's a pipe dream.
Anyway, having had a look through the vault, I think that's the weakest part for me. I think it needed a bit more stuff out of the gate, and a clearer idea of what will be added.
For example, will the lore parts of previous edition codexes be added? Classic stuff like the 2nd Ed Codex Imperialis?
BrianDavion wrote: So the white dwarf issues whats the latest issue currently avaliable in the mix?
The only ones available right now are 450-459, the ten issues published in 2020. If one was hoping the were going to let you read more recent ones than that, I’d say that was a pipe dream - they still want to sell you the current mags.
Gert wrote: I would be surprised to see creator credits on GW stuff. Not because of some silly "GW is evil and wants all the credit" thing but because the fanbase is incredibly toxic and has shown in the past that it can and will do illegal things to creators people deem "bad".
They don't even put up the voice casts (or, at least, it wasn't present in the H&B preview ep they put up - maybe the app itself has the cast list).
endlesswaltz123 wrote: The lengths people will go to, to win an argument on here at times are unreal.
chaos0xomega isn't really going to any great lengths. He was correct right from the start.
The fact that people continue to wilfully mischaracterise, misconstrue and generally ignore everything he says (and what Wha said originally) doesn't make what he's saying any less true.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They don't even put up the voice casts (or, at least, it wasn't present in the H&B preview ep they put up - maybe the app itself has the cast list).
They may end up in trouble if this is the case. In some countries it's actually required by law.
Well the first hurdle is My Warhammer, which won't let me log in, won't let me reset my password, and provides no method to resolve this other than a link to a "Contact Us" page that has nothing relevant for the My Warhammer page (who do I contact? Not store CS, not "App" people... the community team?).
There's a nice colourscheme for DKoK in Warhammer Visions 2, with brown coats and so on, I like it enough to consider doing my Octarius DKoK like that. I'm also absolutely hooked on the Blanchitsu series in those mags
Between AoD, Warhammer Visions and the army builder in the 40K app, I'm OK with the fiver a month price tbh. It's a much better proposition than the older pricing, which was just for getting into the app builder alone.
If those "vintage" White Dwarfs from the late eighties & 90s get added to the Vault, I'll be very pleased!
Battle reports were okay. Nothing spectacular but fellows entertaining enough and easy to follow along. Aos one was bit hurt by questionable grand strategy choice so orruks were basically 3vp down from get-go and horrible deployment choice. 40k had less obvious. On plus side we got couple tasters from new battletomes on aos side.
Painting tutorials okay. Wet blending bit simple one and would have liked to see example done on screen with real model over base. Face one was more interesting and going to try my hand with that one later.
Irritatingly app doesn't unlock but just hangs on "transmitting security ident" step.remember this happening before when i subbed for a month so not new issue.
tneva82 wrote: Battle reports were okay. Nothing spectacular but fellows entertaining enough and easy to follow along. Aos one was bit hurt by questionable grand strategy choice so orruks were basically 3vp down from get-go and horrible deployment choice. 40k had less obvious. On plus side we got couple tasters from new battletomes on aos side.
Painting tutorials okay. Wet blending bit simple one and would have liked to see example done on screen with real model over base. Face one was more interesting and going to try my hand with that one later.
Irritatingly app doesn't unlock but just hangs on "transmitting security ident" step.remember this happening before when i subbed for a month so not new issue.
I had the same problem with the app, I had to uninstall, open the my warhammer site on my mobile, sign in and click the link to install from there and that got it working.
Oo. Had tried uninstall and install but not via link. Don't see how going to google play via link helps...but hey i ain't complaining if it works! (which it did)
Bound For Greatness was a nice surprise and sort of restored my interest towards more H&B episodes. A full episode with 0 seconds of bolter pron, who woulda thought
I did the year subscription, I think it is worth it. If take out the $60 that special characters cost now days (the vinidicare) and the other $35 is for a year of the 40k app (Australian money) everything else is free (it costs me like $45 a year atm for the 40k app so).
I watched the shows. The blood angel one looks ok as in I am interested (just wish the episodes were longer). The full cartoon one seems to be a series of short stories (I hope they tie into together later).
The 40k battle report (last thing I watched), is meh. Tbh I turned it off half way through. The content producers are ok (only first episode I can't really tell), the problem is the style of battle report. It's so like maybe 3years ago (that some channels tried out), explaining everything, you don't really see the game play or banter etc, its to clinical. Not my cup of tea, the intro was good but.
Overall worth the money for the model and the 40k app, everything else is gravy.
EDIT: The thing I want (maybe there is but I can't find it) a single app that allows me to log into everything (I don't want to have a 40k app, a warhammer tv app etc etc).
Marshal Loss wrote: Curious how the battle reports compare in quality to some of the bigger channels around like Tabletop Tactics, etc, if anybody has any thoughts?
I think Tabletop tactics and Miniwargaming Battle reports etc smash Warhammer TV Battle reports from the first showing. Warhammer TV battle reports have no vitality atm or anything, looks like an add for how to play. Only first episode, maybe they will change. The production quality but is top notch.
On the battle reports? Do provide feedback to GW on what you did and didn’t enjoy about them.
I found them enjoyable, but wouldn’t mind something a bit crunchier (such as discussing why they picked units, and what synergies to watch out for), and some more heavy on the narrative (such as lopsided forces, with the mission parameters being the equalising factor.
Can someone confirm for me if you can download the apps to different devices once subscribed - ie put it on an iPad and an Android phone.
I tend to use my phone for the current 40K app as I always have it with me wherever I go, but would prefer my iPad for reading white dwarf etc (for the screen reading estate).
Also, can you stream the video content from a device to a chromecast/TV or are you locked to sitting at a PC or watching on your device only?
Thanks both, appreciated. I'm a little pessimistic about GW battle reports as it's hard to imagine the presenters speaking frankly for obvious reasons, but it'll be interesting to see whether/how they improve over time.
FrothingMuppet wrote: Can someone confirm for me if you can download the apps to different devices once subscribed - ie put it on an iPad and an Android phone.
I tend to use my phone for the current 40K app as I always have it with me wherever I go, but would prefer my iPad for reading white dwarf etc (for the screen reading estate).
Also, can you stream the video content from a device to a chromecast/TV or are you locked to sitting at a PC or watching on your device only?
I was able to cast to my LG TV from my iPad with no trouble.
FrothingMuppet wrote: Can someone confirm for me if you can download the apps to different devices once subscribed - ie put it on an iPad and an Android phone.
I tend to use my phone for the current 40K app as I always have it with me wherever I go, but would prefer my iPad for reading white dwarf etc (for the screen reading estate).
Also, can you stream the video content from a device to a chromecast/TV or are you locked to sitting at a PC or watching on your device only?
If have the apps downloaded you can chromecast. For example, I have the apps on my phone and tablet (both Samsung but) and can Chromecast to my TV.
The videos but I couldn't make full screen for some reason... (but maybe me, until I look at it better).
I just wish was a single app tbh.
On computer, I also can't make the video's full screen atm, but can watch and log onto everything.
FrothingMuppet wrote: Can someone confirm for me if you can download the apps to different devices once subscribed - ie put it on an iPad and an Android phone.
I tend to use my phone for the current 40K app as I always have it with me wherever I go, but would prefer my iPad for reading white dwarf etc (for the screen reading estate).
Also, can you stream the video content from a device to a chromecast/TV or are you locked to sitting at a PC or watching on your device only?
I have the app installed on an Android TV, iPad and Android phone without any issues.
And yes, the app supports casting (though I found casting performance to be worse than using the native Android TV app yesterday, but that might be launch day cache jitters).
Or you're confusing me for someone else ("and by the time you posted that multiple people on the thread had told you that" - point of fact, no they didn't. I only made one post on the topic after seeing people go after Wha-mu for irrelevant reasons. If people did point out that the book takes place in the city's capital by that point in the thread, they definitely were not directed at me, and I definitely didn't read them).
Fair enough - I was just baffled why you kept bringing up something that had been settled when multiple people explained about the book. That you're not reading the whole thread means that makes perfect sense now.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They don't even put up the voice casts (or, at least, it wasn't present in the H&B preview ep they put up - maybe the app itself has the cast list).
They credited the production to Farside Features and the music to someone I forgot and don't know.
Farside Features is a studio working on different projects, wouldn't surprise me if the voice casters are part of their team.
As for the battle reports, hard to judge so far but yes the production is top notch and other channels like Miniwargaming can't compete on that field, clearly. It's just the personnality of the players, in the end. I found them fine, but it's true I wasn't especially interested in looking at the content of Dominion / Indomitus boxes, even though it was nicely done.
With time and when they add games with more "freedom", it should be very good. They have ressources amateur channels can't match.
I'm honestly curious to see what they can do with more narrative games. If they make campaigns suggested recently in Warhammer Community with games using 40k, Kill Team and Aeronautica Imperialis to tell a story, boy can it be glorious.
So far, my favourite is Bound to Greatness.
"Knowledge corrupts, do you understand adept Neath ?"
H.B.M.C. wrote: They don't even put up the voice casts (or, at least, it wasn't present in the H&B preview ep they put up - maybe the app itself has the cast list).
As for the battle reports, hard to judge so far but yes the production is top notch and other channels like Miniwargaming can't compete on that field, clearly. It's just the personnality of the players, in the end. I found them fine, but it's true I wasn't especially interested in looking at the content of Dominion / Indomitus boxes, even though it was nicely done.
The 40k battle report wasn't using the contents of the Indomitus box, maybe half of the Necron force was from Indomitus (though that was mostly the warriors so not surprising) and even had a Forgeworld model in there, IIRC the Space Marine force used even less from Indomitus, can't even think of a single model from it off the top of my head, but suspect there probably were some (possibly the melta gun guys who's name I forget).
H.B.M.C. wrote: They don't even put up the voice casts (or, at least, it wasn't present in the H&B preview ep they put up - maybe the app itself has the cast list).
As for the battle reports, hard to judge so far but yes the production is top notch and other channels like Miniwargaming can't compete on that field, clearly. It's just the personnality of the players, in the end. I found them fine, but it's true I wasn't especially interested in looking at the content of Dominion / Indomitus boxes, even though it was nicely done.
The 40k battle report wasn't using the contents of the Indomitus box, maybe half of the Necron force was from Indomitus (though that was mostly the warriors so not surprising) and even had a Forgeworld model in there, IIRC the Space Marine force used even less from Indomitus, can't even think of a single model from it off the top of my head, but suspect there probably were some (possibly the melta gun guys who's name I forget).
Yea eradictors were or at least could be from there. Maybe one or two of hq's. Basic troops were original primaris, dreadnought and repulsor obviously not from launch box...
Aos it was almost all domitus box(just the winged girl missing to even points) but 40k only real comparison is the factions were same. But who didn't expect marines to be involved and necrons hardly unreasonable opponent in first game
I watched all the animations and the 40k battle report yesterday and it wasn't half bad.
Angels of Death - Episode 1:
Somewhat janky animation (mostly faces and lipsync) contrasted by really nice tracking shots and atmosphere. Some of the scenes on the space ship almost looked like live action shots, which surprised me a lot. I assume the grey filter imposed on the whole thing did help with that, but that's a reasonable way to cut corners with what was likely a low-ish budget production. Characters and their motives were set up nicely, the dynamic between them promises interesting conflicts within the group.
Conclusion: Genuinely excited about the next episode
Hammer and Bolter - Death's Hand:
More of what we've seen in Old Bale Eye. Again, janky animations that this time around could not be salvaged by other positive elements. The fight between the opposing inquisitorial retinues was incredibly static, and the admittedly satisfying gore shots did not quite make up for it. The Callidus design looked fantastic, though. The plot twist was not properly set up, but it was fine for a 20 min short story.
Hammer and Bolter – Bound for Greatness:
Here we have the same issues with animation and that's unlikely going to change for this series, so we might as well accept it for what it is. The story starts out promising with a properly dystopian depiction of the protagonist's everyday life. Good atmosphere and a twist that was not super obvious from the get go. Will he become corrupted? What is the prefect planning? Is there a conspiracy between the priests and the prefect? This episode managed to keep the tension high for a long time, but then suddenly became very obvious with literal depictions of daemons, bird hands and shadows that left no question unanswered. Even for a 20 minute short I'd have hoped for a bit more subtlety. I know this is preferential, but for me they were too on the nose with Tzeentch's involvement. Sometimes, less is more.
Conclusion: Hammer and Bolter is definitely the less interesting format for me. I'll watch it out of the sheer craving for 40k animation, but this format needs a serious increase in polish to become great.
Alexonian wrote: I thought becoming a + member would give you full access to the app, which I thought meant unlocking all the codexes, seems that's not the case
That's what the code found in the codex is for.
Sure, but that doesnt mean something else also could unlock it.
when they say warhammer+ gives you full access to the warhammer 40k app I thought that whats it meant, I would say it doesnt give you full access.
tauist wrote: There's a nice colourscheme for DKoK in Warhammer Visions 2, with brown coats and so on, I like it enough to consider doing my Octarius DKoK like that. I'm also absolutely hooked on the Blanchitsu series in those mags
Between AoD, Warhammer Visions and the army builder in the 40K app, I'm OK with the fiver a month price tbh. It's a much better proposition than the older pricing, which was just for getting into the app builder alone.
If those "vintage" White Dwarfs from the late eighties & 90s get added to the Vault, I'll be very pleased!
All things considered, WH+ is aight in my book
I've just looked at the DKoK scheme, it's essentially the steel legion scheme if you do want to go for it.
The Blanchitsu stuff in the mags, a lot of the people who made them had amazing blogs on here back in the day, great threads if you can find them.
"Full access" in this case means "full access to features", not "full access to content", unfortunately. There is no way to get all the codexes unlocked in the app other than to buy all the codexes and enter the codes.
chaos0xomega wrote: "Full access" in this case means "full access to features", not "full access to content", unfortunately. There is no way to get all the codexes unlocked in the app other than to buy all the codexes and enter the codes.
Yeah its dumb, unsubed immediatly after I realised.
Cartoons: It reminds me a lot of MTV's Liquid Television series from the 90s. Much like GW's audio dramas, it's a richer, if old-timey, experience than the books and I'm fine with the fact that it doesn't reach the highest levels of modern animation.
Masterclass: I like what they're going for with the format. The graphic overlays of color areas on the face are a good illustration of artistic principles. As were the more explicit mixing recipes. References to the color wheel in the blending video were good, but a basic primer on color theory would have been a nice add-on. Louise is a dynamic presenter and a good host, but her painting style is so idiosyncratic that I don't think she's the best demonstrater for some of the techniques. E.g. I kind of wish they tacked on an extra 15 minutes that showed someone from the 'Eavy Metal team actually doing the wet blending on Eidolon model. Or just copy Richard Grey's technique and let us watch a full painting session from the studio team.
Also, I know they want to showcase their products, but they should use a freaking Redgrass Wet Palette until they inevitably release their own. If you're just going to use a sopping mess of paper towl and parchment paper at least do a video that explains how to DIY it for users! Right now MC is in a weird spot in that it assumes viewers will have esoteric knowledge about paint preperation hacks but will be happy with content that is of lower quality than that found on at least half a dozen free YT channels. Still, strong potential here.
Mini/Vouchers: I imagine there will be opportunities to buy limited edition minis and vouchers 2-4 times per year. The Vindicare model alone feels like a $40-50 kit.
Vault: Warhammer Visions alone is worth it to me, can't wait for more of the archive. Only gripe is that I wish there were a dedicated app for better iPad viewing.
Loremasters: Really looking forward to this. Wade was the highlight of the Twitch stream, IMHO. Fingers crossed his lungs hold up!
Wishlist: I kind of hope they have some "Walk down memory lane" style show featuring old models, old codices, etc. Behind the scenes pics from the old days. One of GW's strength is seeming permanance in a fast-changing industry. Mark Rosewater does a good job with this on his podcast WRT M:TG, hopefully GW takes a note!
Still early days, but the value definitely feels real in my opinion.
I think it's a bit crazy to think the subscription would unlock all codex's, considering the code format they are following and the small cost of this subscription. But I see the confusion.
From the looks of their battle reports so far:
I think the pump out websites (like Miniwargaming & Guerrilla Minatare Gaming, etc) that do a Battle report every day will do great. Maybe not as good production, but they are not about that. Like when I get home from work, I want to watch a fun report when go to sleep every night...awesome, put on MWG or GMG. The banter and synergy on these reports is way higher anyway.
The more refined reports (as in post pre-duction) or once a week posters, will still do good as well, Like Tabletop tactics, SS82, Tabletop titans, Mountain Miniatures etc cause on the weekend when painting, I want to watch something as well. The banter and synergy on these reports is high as well.
I think these Warhammer TV Battle reports will fill the later, like when I have watched all I like and painting and need something in the background.
I can't find the lore channel that is supposedly there to compare it or even if compares to Luetin09. Except a lore PDF on Ghazghkull???? No video or anything
Jadenim wrote: So I signed up yesterday, but I can’t see how to get the £10 voucher (and it’s not automatically showing up in my “My Warhammer” account)?
They will email it to you on October 1st so long as you are still subscribed at that time.
Jadenim wrote: So I signed up yesterday, but I can’t see how to get the £10 voucher (and it’s not automatically showing up in my “My Warhammer” account)?
It'll be sent to you at the start of October (assuming you renewed your subscription in September).
Jadenim wrote: So I signed up yesterday, but I can’t see how to get the £10 voucher (and it’s not automatically showing up in my “My Warhammer” account)?
October. Needs to be subscriber for 1st october. Then it's given. So don't let it lapse in between(in practice you need to be subscriber for 2 months)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I don’t see WHTV doing any harm to other Battle Report video creators.
Rather they might whet the whistle of the viewer to go and seek more such content..
True, but GW hasn't demonstrated themselves subverting the law to achieve their means anyway.
Them removing what animations they did was very above board.
I don't think we need that level of tinfoil hattery.
hypnoticeris wrote: I was looking forwards to having access to some vintage codexes, but for now the catalogue is not great.
I'm guessing the modern stuff is easy to do because it has been designed to be released digitally, so they can basically just stick it on the system. Older stuff is likely to need conversion and updating, or even manual scanning I guess, so maybe not worth the effort from GWs point of view, though I would like to see it appear!
hypnoticeris wrote: I was looking forwards to having access to some vintage codexes, but for now the catalogue is not great.
I'm guessing the modern stuff is easy to do because it has been designed to be released digitally, so they can basically just stick it on the system. Older stuff is likely to need conversion and updating, or even manual scanning I guess, so maybe not worth the effort from GWs point of view, though I would like to see it appear!
Old-school issues of White Dwarf would be awesome. Would be nice to look back at the time when it still felt like wargaming with your buddies on the local table and not the heavily corporate stuff we see these days.
It seems like the 'Vault' is them just chucking up those PDFs they have lying around so they can list another benefit.
Older issues are probably saved in either another format they don't care to convert, or have been lost/deleted or never saved in the first place.
You can go and DMCA any YT video right now, and it's on the video owner to fight it. They probably will win, but there is nothing stopping people from abusing the system.
GW could 100% dmca anything with Warhammer in it's name, and there's a good chance a number of them would either back down out of fear of legal action, or YT would not agree with them and keep up the claim. How many people would go to court over it if YT deleted their channel over the claims?
kirotheavenger wrote: GW can't close down BatReps, IP rights just don't even begin to spread that far.
IP rights have nothing to do with DMCA Strikes and Youtube removing Video
Yes they do, and it's ludicrous hyperbole to suggest otherwise.
I guess you had never anything to do with those
a DMCA strike works the other way around, you are taken down and must proof that your content is not infringing anybodies copyright and/or edit your videos to remove the parts that are mentioned as breaking it
those asking for the take down, don't need to proof anything or even need to be those holding the IP
simple example, a guy making LEGO reviews refered to a non LEGO product as "Lego bricks" instead of "interlocking plastic bricks", his videos were taken down by YT after DMCA from LEGO
So GW can very easily take on every battle report (if they wanted to) who is not very clear on terms/wording and/or using non GW stuff together with GW models without being very clear which is which
kirotheavenger wrote: GW can't close down BatReps, IP rights just don't even begin to spread that far.
IP rights have nothing to do with DMCA Strikes and Youtube removing Video
Yes they do, and it's ludicrous hyperbole to suggest otherwise.
I guess you had never anything to do with those
a DMCA strike works the other way around, you are taken down and must proof that your content is not infringing anybodies copyright and/or edit your videos to remove the parts that are mentioned as breaking it
those asking for the take down, don't need to proof anything or even need to be those holding the IP
simple example, a guy making LEGO reviews refered to a non LEGO product as "Lego bricks" instead of "interlocking plastic bricks", his videos were taken down by YT after DMCA from LEGO
So GW can very easily take on every battle report (if they wanted to) who is not very clear on terms/wording and/or using non GW stuff together with GW models without being very clear which is which
The Lego case isn’t even about Lego being in a continuous fight to protect its Trade Mark. The patent on Lego has expired, so anyone can make Lego compatible bricks, but can’t call them Lego because that’s a registered trademark. The danger for Lego though, is that “Lego” becomes the common term for little plastic bricks and their trademark becomes undefendable as a result. GW isn’t in that situation.
A battle report is little more than somebody filming themselves using a product they bought for its intended use. The idea that IP rights prevents them from doing that is nonsense. If GW wanted to hurt YouTube content, the first thing they could legitimately do is stop sending content creators free copies of their games and books. Yet, every major content creator seems to have been sent a free copy of Kill Team in the last couple of weeks.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: The Lego case isn’t even about Lego being in a continuous fight to protect its Trade Mark. The patent on Lego has expired, so anyone can make Lego compatible bricks, but can’t call them Lego because that’s a registered trademark. The danger for Lego though, is that “Lego” becomes the common term for little plastic bricks and their trademark becomes undefendable as a result. GW isn’t in that situation.
...why is that not the case with Kleenex, or Post-it, then? Because those are still trademarks, enforced and enforceable, and also the common term for, respectively, paper tissues and adhesive notes.
Or, hell, Google. As far as I know, all these are still trademarks:
I mean, I understand Lego (or GW, or whatever) would need to litigate if some other company were to use Lego in the name, but a random YT out of the internet? There's no case there to litigate. Like, at all.
Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
Gert wrote: Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
Fan animations were the gateway for another kind of content on YouTube, and we know what happened there.
Gert wrote: Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
Fan animations were the gateway for another kind of content on YouTube, and we know what happened there.
Yeah, I guess it's more looking for patterns... IIRC, the takedown notices for animations were for the ones that were monetized, yes? How many of those batrep channels are also monetized?
Gert wrote: Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
I think they would only ever try and take one down if the YT person was really causing some damage to them by using excessively foul terminology.....Though Majorkill seems to have survived their wrath so far. GW has tried to appeal to the younger crowd and I think would protect that piece of their image a little harder.
Gert wrote: Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
Fan animations were the gateway for another kind of content on YouTube, and we know what happened there.
Yeah, I guess it's more looking for patterns... IIRC, the takedown notices for animations were for the ones that were monetized, yes? How many of those batrep channels are also monetized?
Not sure which have commercials - using YouTube premium or whatever it's called so they don't show up for me.
All the channels have ways to give them money though.
Given that GW's fan animation shutdown seems to have been intended to funnel people into Warhammer+ animations, it's not unreasonable that GW would look at the same method to attempt to move people into their other types of Warhammer+ content.
As for whether they're within their rights to do so - the unfortunate truth is that YouTube has a "shoot first, question later" approach to channel takedowns.
Gert wrote: Anyone suggesting that GW will attempt to take down YT BatRep channels isn't using their brain.
These channels are the first port of call for a lot of YT content for wargaming and GW has done a collaboration of sorts with MWG in the past. YT BatReps aren't going anywhere.
Fan animations were the gateway for another kind of content on YouTube, and we know what happened there.
Yeah, I guess it's more looking for patterns... IIRC, the takedown notices for animations were for the ones that were monetized, yes? How many of those batrep channels are also monetized?
First of all, all of them. The good ones have Patreons and Twitch streams and subscriptions too. Second, you're looking for patterns in corporate policy making, which is silly. GW going after fan animations is just as likely to be a result of a VP who watched a hit piece about Anime's Loli problem the day before a big meeting and assumed all animation would have innapropriate content about underage girls, as it to be about anything more substantial or objective.
People aren't consistent and corporations are even less so.
Just out of curiosity, has anyone tried upgrading the warhammer app to the warhammer+ app? I just get a spinning wheel. I could just getting it the normal way, but I'd hate to be paying for two separate apps.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: The Lego case isn’t even about Lego being in a continuous fight to protect its Trade Mark. The patent on Lego has expired, so anyone can make Lego compatible bricks, but can’t call them Lego because that’s a registered trademark. The danger for Lego though, is that “Lego” becomes the common term for little plastic bricks and their trademark becomes undefendable as a result. GW isn’t in that situation.
...why is that not the case with Kleenex, or Post-it, then? Because those are still trademarks, enforced and enforceable, and also the common term for, respectively, paper tissues and adhesive notes.
Or, hell, Google. As far as I know, all these are still trademarks:
I mean, I understand Lego (or GW, or whatever) would need to litigate if some other company were to use Lego in the name, but a random YT out of the internet? There's no case there to litigate. Like, at all.
I’m not a spokesperson for Kleenex, so I can’t answer your question.
Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: The Lego case isn’t even about Lego being in a continuous fight to protect its Trade Mark. The patent on Lego has expired, so anyone can make Lego compatible bricks, but can’t call them Lego because that’s a registered trademark. The danger for Lego though, is that “Lego” becomes the common term for little plastic bricks and their trademark becomes undefendable as a result. GW isn’t in that situation.
...why is that not the case with Kleenex, or Post-it, then? Because those are still trademarks, enforced and enforceable, and also the common term for, respectively, paper tissues and adhesive notes.
Or, hell, Google. As far as I know, all these are still trademarks:
I mean, I understand Lego (or GW, or whatever) would need to litigate if some other company were to use Lego in the name, but a random YT out of the internet? There's no case there to litigate. Like, at all.
I’m not a spokesperson for Kleenex, so I can’t answer your question.
Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
I think Kleenex is more common as an American term for tissues? A more common UK example might be hoover, or hoovering, instead of vacuuming?
ERJAK wrote: First of all, all of them. The good ones have Patreons and Twitch streams and subscriptions too. Second, you're looking for patterns in corporate policy making, which is silly. GW going after fan animations is just as likely to be a result of a VP who watched a hit piece about Anime's Loli problem the day before a big meeting and assumed all animation would have innapropriate content about underage girls, as it to be about anything more substantial or objective.
People aren't consistent and corporations are even less so.
Or, you know, maybe I would posit it's more likely that it was because of them launching a streaming plattform.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
All the damn time, yes. Over here, it's about 60-40 against "paper tissue". Same as over here "sliced bread" and "bimbo bread" are one and the same, even if there's a lot of brands.
Spoiler:
EDIT: The actual point, though, is that issuing takedowns on YT (or whatever) videos for using terms like "lego blocks" is bollocks, doesn't affect trademark and are simply strong arm tactics. They do it because YT takes down everything and it's the uploader who has to prove the lack of infringment. Or, in other words, they do it because they let them and because bullying people with bs works.
EDIT: The actual point, though, is that issuing takedowns on YT (or whatever) videos for using terms like "lego blocks" is bollocks, doesn't affect trademark and are simply strong arm tactics. They do it because YT takes down everything and it's the uploader who has to prove the lack of infringment. Or, in other words, they do it because they let them and because bullying people with bs works.
hence why I used it as example how easy GW could do it
there is no need to have a real issue behind it, GW just need to make one by arguing that such thing harm their brand and YT will happily remove it without further questions
MonkeyBallistic wrote: Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
All the damn time, yes. Over here, it's about 60-40 against "paper tissue". Same as over here "sliced bread" and "bimbo bread" are one and the same, even if there's a lot of brands.
Spoiler:
EDIT: The actual point, though, is that issuing takedowns on YT (or whatever) videos for using terms like "lego blocks" is bollocks, doesn't affect trademark and are simply strong arm tactics. They do it because YT takes down everything and it's the uploader who has to prove the lack of infringment. Or, in other words, they do it because they let them and because bullying people with bs works.
That isn’t how YouTube works, you contest it. This can depend on a lot of things, but ultimately they have to respond in a time or drop the accusation.
One of the issues is, since it takes time. And they can hold it up for a while, if you get a number against a channel all at once it can be a real pain. As YouTube will place restrictions on a channel if you have too many strikes against you all at once.
At a point, they have to say yes. We will move it to the courts to decide or concede the claims. The issue comes, that smaller channels don’t really have the means to fight it once it leaves YouTube. So if they are not sure about there legal grounds they will concede it even if they may not have too.
For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
Apple fox wrote: That isn’t how YouTube works, you contest it. This can depend on a lot of things, but ultimately they have to respond in a time or drop the accusation.
One of the issues is, since it takes time. And they can hold it up for a while, if you get a number against a channel all at once it can be a real pain. As YouTube will place restrictions on a channel if you have too many strikes against you all at once.
At a point, they have to say yes. We will move it to the courts to decide or concede the claims. The issue comes, that smaller channels don’t really have the means to fight it once it leaves YouTube. So if they are not sure about there legal grounds they will concede it even if they may not have too.
Not quite. First YT takes the content down, then you can contest it. That's the important part.
As it happens, the first thing that will come to pass is that the videos will be taken down for however it takes for the uploader to contest it... and in many occasiones that's enough.
Other times the uploader gets scared and doesn't even contest it, which also is a good outcome for the company.
Other times yet, it is simply harassment tactics: you contest everything from a specific channel, and every new thing they release, which will make sweet hell out of the uploader's life, if you just want to be petty about it.
Taking content down might not even be the point at all, on this, and YT's TOS work towards the claimant unless the uploader resists.
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
difference is, GW does not want free advertising if they cannot control it
Nintendo and a number of other companies did use to go after LPlayers and monetize their videos for themselves. It's how Jim Stephanie Sterling came up with the youtube copyright jam where they included footage of multiple games and music properties to ensure no one could claim monetization.
So as a Warhammer+ subscriber I should have access to the battleforge and the pre-9th edition codexes in the Warhammer 40,000 app. But that’s not the case (yet) - instead I only have the option to take out an app subscription (which I’m obviously not going to do). Anyone else have that problem? Is there a solution or have they simply not gotten round to fixing that yet?
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
difference is, GW does not want free advertising if they cannot control it
So why were they sending out free advance copies of Kill Team to content creators mere days before the launch of Warhammer+?
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
difference is, GW does not want free advertising if they cannot control it
So why were they sending out free advance copies of Kill Team to content creators mere days before the launch of Warhammer+?
because this way they have control over the review
Insane Ivan wrote: So as a Warhammer+ subscriber I should have access to the battleforge and the pre-9th edition codexes in the Warhammer 40,000 app. But that’s not the case (yet) - instead I only have the option to take out an app subscription (which I’m obviously not going to do). Anyone else have that problem? Is there a solution or have they simply not gotten round to fixing that yet?
Is it just me or is there no way of watching the streamed content on PC in full screen or with the mouse cursor hidden? This just seems so fundamental I keep thinking I must be missing something...
Unknown_Lifeform wrote: Is it just me or is there no way of watching the streamed content on PC in full screen or with the mouse cursor hidden? This just seems so fundamental I keep thinking I must be missing something...
Did you try to move the cursor all the way to the right?
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
difference is, GW does not want free advertising if they cannot control it
So why were they sending out free advance copies of Kill Team to content creators mere days before the launch of Warhammer+?
because this way they have control over the review
But they don’t. I’ve seen at least one content creator talking about how disappointed they were with Kill Team. In fact, it was after seeing several reviews of Kill Team that I now feel glad that I didn’t order the box and have no interest in getting into Kill Team.
You could maybe argue that GW might not send more review copies to people who give them bad reviews, but it’s also easy to see why that’s not a good idea.
Insane Ivan wrote: So as a Warhammer+ subscriber I should have access to the battleforge and the pre-9th edition codexes in the Warhammer 40,000 app. But that’s not the case (yet) - instead I only have the option to take out an app subscription (which I’m obviously not going to do). Anyone else have that problem? Is there a solution or have they simply not gotten round to fixing that yet?
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
difference is, GW does not want free advertising if they cannot control it
So why were they sending out free advance copies of Kill Team to content creators mere days before the launch of Warhammer+?
because this way they have control over the review
Oh lol. So your theory is gw wants bad negative reviews? Loool
People who got sent copies of Indomitus or Dominion haven't been saying 9th Edition and AoS 3.0 are super amazing perfect systems. GW sends out review copies, people review them and AFAIK nobody is contractually obliged to say anything is good. The only thing they won't be allowed to say is anything libelous, which would hardly be a shock considering libel is illegal.
None of those reviews I have seen, were they got a free copy, was negative
they just did not talk about the negative parts like talking about how awesome the models are while showing pics with the worst mould lines on new models I have ever seen and not talking about gameplay at all
the negative ones were about the compendium, which was not with the free box
but if you have a link for reviews that got free copy and talked negative about the it, would like to see it
Gert wrote: People who got sent copies of Indomitus or Dominion haven't been saying 9th Edition and AoS 3.0 are super amazing perfect systems. GW sends out review copies, people review them and AFAIK nobody is contractually obliged to say anything is good. The only thing they won't be allowed to say is anything libelous, which would hardly be a shock considering libel is illegal.
Yeah, I mean, that gives GW publicity and some control over what channels get traffic, as they can dictate who gets advance stuff and who don't (and they can also dictate when some information gets available, as we saw with the KT compendium), but in this case we're talking more of a sort of "soft power", I don't think they could exert any hard control over those channels.
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
Don't point at other studios for examples of what Games Workshop will and won't do, because (here's a shocker) Games Workshop isn't those studios.
We don't know what Games Workshop is going to do. We can comment on what they have done, however, and what they have done is take down a portion of the fan-created content on YouTube right before they launched their own service to replace that content.
We can also comment on what YouTube does in terms of video takedown requests - namely, YouTube errs on the side of taking the video down and then figures out who was right later.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
All the damn time, yes. Over here, it's about 60-40 against "paper tissue". Same as over here "sliced bread" and "bimbo bread" are one and the same, even if there's a lot of brands.
Spoiler:
I spent the first 30 years of my life not knowing that the polish word my family used for vacuum was a brand name because the company wasn't popular in the US and only started advertising on tv about 10-15 years ago!
phandaal wrote: Don't point at other studios for examples of what Games Workshop will and won't do, because (here's a shocker) Games Workshop isn't those studios.
Do you know what a comparison is?
We don't know what Games Workshop is going to do. We can comment on what they have done, however, and what they have done is take down a portion of the fan-created content on YouTube right before they launched their own service to replace that content.
To be more specific, GW took down certain content that violated their IP rules, and as far as anyone knows this was a perfectly legal thing to do. We can debate the moral implications until the heat death of the universe but from a legal standpoint, GW didn't do anything wrong.
Let's Play videos and BatReps would very likely fall under similar Copyright rules, which technically is nothing because no studio/publisher has ever challenged the collective system of Let's Play videos.
Nintendo tried to claim ad revenue off of some creator's videos containing Mario content but backed off from this and created a partnership program instead. The vast majority of studios/publishers support the Let's Play system because of the free marketing system that it is and of the numerous potential issues challenging its status could entail.
The point of comparing GW to larger studios/publishers is that it sets a precedent. If even the biggest game companies in the world either can't or don't want to challenge the system, then it is very likely GW will do the same.
We can also comment on what YouTube does in terms of video takedown requests - namely, YouTube errs on the side of taking the video down and then figures out who was right later.
Yeah, YT is a bad platform.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Crucial question. And I ask it with clean hands because I genuinely don’t know the answer.
To date, has GW actually tried to get any battle reports pulled?
I've never seen or heard anything to suggest the company has tried this.
IP rights have nothing to do with DMCA Strikes and Youtube removing Video
You do know that DMCA stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act, right? It's right there in the name.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Crucial question. And I ask it with clean hands because I genuinely don’t know the answer.
To date, has GW actually tried to get any battle reports pulled?
Not that we know of, as of yet, but if the logic behind why they're opposing animations holds, it make sense that they, or lore videos, will get the axe as well.
BaronIveagh wrote: Not that we know of, as of yet, but if the logic behind why they're opposing animations holds, it make sense that they, or lore videos, will get the axe as well.
Ah yes, the Slippery Slope fallacy. Because surely if GW took down animations that must mean they're going to eat babies, right?
There's a reason it's called a fallacy.
There’s a world of difference between showing off their game, and using their IP to create something else.
That would be an opinion, yeah?
To be clear: not saying Games Workshop is going to go after battle reports. We don't know what they're going to do either way.
We can absolutely say that Games Workshop has taken down content while they were in the midst of shifting said content into their new subscription service.
Whether it's legal or supported by Intellectual Property rights or any of that is irrelevant. None of the recent content creator takedowns made it to court. Games Workshop got what they wanted simply by claiming they could.
Taking all of that into consideration, it isn't crazy to point out that Games Workshop could use the same tactic to attempt to shift all battle report viewers onto their own service as well. In that case, it would be similarly pointless to argue over whether or not the law supports it unless someone actually decided to go to court against Games Workshop.
Making money off GW's IP by producing battle reports is not fundamentally different than making money off GW's IP by making animations. It's not an unreasonable slippery slope to suggest the one could lead to the other.
Now presumably GW is smart enough to realize that going after free advertising for its IP is deeply stupid...but then they went after fan animations, which were also free advertising for its IP. So you never really know.
Gert wrote: For those saying GW will go after BatRep channels, has 343 gone after Halo Let's Play channels? What about all the channels that play CoD, does Activision go after them?
No. Because its free advertising. There are far more BatRep channels than animation channels and on top of that the BatRep channels use GW products 90% of the time, with terrain or boards/mats being the biggest 3rd party products. BatRep channels aren't using the IP, they're using the product.
Don't point at other studios for examples of what Games Workshop will and won't do, because (here's a shocker) Games Workshop isn't those studios.
We don't know what Games Workshop is going to do. We can comment on what they have done, however, and what they have done is take down a portion of the fan-created content on YouTube right before they launched their own service to replace that content.
We can also comment on what YouTube does in terms of video takedown requests - namely, YouTube errs on the side of taking the video down and then figures out who was right later.
What animations btw they shut down? Not if emperor had text to speech atleast. Don't follow animations that closely. Tts i keep mentioned but of course gw did nothing regarding that one.
They literally send review copies of games to channels that do battle reports, including kill team very recently. I don’t think they’d do that if they had an issue with battle reports (considering at least one channel is doing a KT battle report series).
An opinion with more logic and fact behind it than anything suggesting GW would go after BatRep channels.
To be clear: not saying Games Workshop is going to go after battle reports. We don't know what they're going to do either way.
No, but we can look at previous evidence and similar situations.
We can absolutely say that Games Workshop has taken down content while they were in the midst of shifting said content into their new subscription service.
Which was going to have BatReps on it. So why didn't GW go after BatRep channels then?
Whether it's legal or supported by Intellectual Property rights or any of that is irrelevant. None of the recent content creator takedowns made it to court. Games Workshop got what they wanted simply by claiming they could.
For something like Astartes, yes GW was well within its legal rights to issue a takedown. But instead, the company sent a job offer. IP rights aren't irrelevant because the only content that has been taken down is content that has actively violated GW's IP policy. Yes, it didn't get to court but such cases often don't. Astartes wasn't a parody of 40k nor was it using assets that were similar but not quite 40k assets, it was clearly 40k. It literally used a GW copyrighted term as its title.
Taking all of that into consideration, it isn't crazy to point out that Games Workshop could use the same tactic to attempt to shift all battle report viewers onto their own service as well.
Crazy? No, there's a distinct line where insanity comes into play. Wrong and pointless fearmongering purely to fan the flames of GW hatred? Yes, absolutely.
In that case, it would be similarly pointless to argue over whether or not the law supports it unless someone actually decided to go to court against Games Workshop.
If a channel refused a takedown request/order then it would be up to GW to prove the channel's content was in violation, something that has never been done before not even by video game companies. The BatRep scene also has companies that produce content rather than simply individuals like with animation. I'm not saying it's a clash of the titans or anything but MWG is hardly going to take it sitting down is it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: Making money off GW's IP by producing battle reports is not fundamentally different than making money off GW's IP by making animations. It's not an unreasonable slippery slope to suggest the one could lead to the other.
It would likely fall into the same untested legal grey area that Let's Play videos fall. An area that again I will add, hasn't even been tested by companies with revenue streams and corporate power many times that of GW.
Crazy? No, there's a distinct line where insanity comes into play. Wrong and pointless fearmongering purely to fan the flames of GW hatred? Yes, absolutely.
Nowhere in any of my posts did I say that anyone should hate Games Workshop for what they are doing.
Relax yourself. Everything's gonna be alright. Games Workshop isn't going to get hurt because people on the internet are wondering if GW will decide that all batreps should be on Warhammer+.
Also have to ask, how is it fearmongering to suggest that content might move onto Warhammer+? Is content being on Warhammer+ somehow worse than that same content being on YouTube? As far as I know, Astartes didn't get any worse after the creator shifted it onto the Warhammer Community site.
Point of order, the IP laws which allow GW to remove animations made with their IP has no provisions protecting them from battle reports, and would not allow them to take down battle report videos.
To suggest that their lawyers would not point this out and recommend against trying to do so/even refusing to personally draft the cease and desist orders is naive.
Yes, when dealing with Youtube you can put in unlawful DMCA claims, and hope it never gets to court. They could hire professional killers to eliminate their competitors and hope it never gets to court too, if that's your standard. As we can see from the failed boycott petitions, most adults aren't buying that standard.
I’m actually just shocked this didn’t crash and burn like Amazon on a Black Friday where so many folks were trying to register/get on at once that no one could.
Though I’m already signed up for too many streaming services as is, so this isn’t for me. Just slowly going through Love Boat while I wait for the next season of Picard to air, for example…
Nowhere in any of my posts did I say that anyone should hate Games Workshop for what they are doing.
Relax yourself. Everything's gonna be alright. Games Workshop isn't going to get hurt because people on the internet are wondering if GW will decide that all batreps should be on Warhammer+.
Very cool of you to reduce my arguments to "emotional stuff", very mature of you For what it's worth, the only thing I'm actually worried about is the people who are the faces of GW, the WarCom team and store workers. When Alfabusa decided to put TTS on hiatus, people jumped at the opportunity, despite being asked not to, to send harassing messages to the WarCom accounts and posted in random completely unconnected posts and threads about how evil GW was, perpetuating an untrue narrative simply to be hateful. I've always had the utmost respect for the Twitch Mods and social media team for the bile that gets spewed towards them.
All these "You could be next!" posts help perpetuate that toxic narrative.
frankelee wrote: Point of order, the IP laws which allow GW to remove animations made with their IP has no provisions protecting them from battle reports, and would not allow them to take down battle report videos.
To suggest that their lawyers would not point this out and recommend against trying to do so/even refusing to personally draft the cease and desist orders is naive.
When did GW's lawyers share this opinion with you?
Yes, when dealing with Youtube you can put in unlawful DMCA claims, and hope it never gets to court. They could hire professional killers to eliminate their competitors and hope it never gets to court too, if that's your standard. As we can see from the failed boycott petitions, most adults aren't buying that standard.
Nowhere in any of my posts did I say that anyone should hate Games Workshop for what they are doing.
Relax yourself. Everything's gonna be alright. Games Workshop isn't going to get hurt because people on the internet are wondering if GW will decide that all batreps should be on Warhammer+.
Very cool of you to reduce my arguments to "emotional stuff", very mature of you
Well, yeah. Lots of emotional words like spew, bile, fearmongering, hateful, toxic, fan the flames of hatred. We aren't charging once more unto the breach, we're talking about Games Workshop's new streaming channel.
For what it's worth, the only thing I'm actually worried about is the people who are the faces of GW, the WarCom team and store workers. When Alfabusa decided to put TTS on hiatus, people jumped at the opportunity, despite being asked not to, to send harassing messages to the WarCom accounts and posted in random completely unconnected posts and threads about how evil GW was, perpetuating an untrue narrative simply to be hateful. I've always had the utmost respect for the Twitch Mods and social media team for the bile that gets spewed towards them.
All these "You could be next!" posts help perpetuate that toxic narrative.
There is nothing hateful about suggesting that Games Workshop might follow a path with battle reports that is similar to the path they took with fan animations.
You can disagree that they will do that, of course.
Some of the big content creators have reached out to lawyers etc to see if they are protected from GW in regards to battle reports. Whilst it is not tested in legal battle (much like streaming video games etc) the consensus seems to be that GW would not win that legal battle.
Unless we have actual legal professionals on this forum, who crucially are also experts within this area and can add significant insight to the debate, can this back and forth argument stop?
By all means re-start if GW do go down this route, but it seems just from the fact they use these content creators/influencers as advertising by handing out review copies, that bat rep videos won't be treated the same as animation videos.
ImAGeek wrote: They literally send review copies of games to channels that do battle reports, including kill team very recently. I don’t think they’d do that if they had an issue with battle reports (considering at least one channel is doing a KT battle report series).
I hate to bring up, you know, GW's history and all, but that doesn't mean anything. I literally got a copy of one of the 40kRPG books in the mail to review the day we got a cease and desist letter demanding we stop showing pictures of their products.
With GW, if you assume logic, reason, or basic competence, you're already failed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: No-one still been able to name animation gw shut down?
Effectively, all of them. According to several of the animators that GW approached, they were given the option to keep animating, but do it on Warhammer+ or cease and desist.
Darren Latham's YT channel got nuked today. Ofc he had been inactive for a while due to GW's intent to take this space with Masterclass. The disappointing thing about this is that they've apparently replaced Razza's stuff with tutorials by Louise Sugden aka SavageOrkGuy, which is akin to replacing Shang dynasty silk with 4ply toilet roll. No offence to Louise ofc, they are big shoes to fill and anyone making the attempt is likely to fail, but w/e, we've lost this prime and also free resource and instead of having it replaced with an equally great but paid resource we've now got something much worse and also not free.
Oh well. I was waiting to see if the new Masterclass would be worth £5 a month (which I'd happily pay for more Razza videos at the rate of one or two pm) but it looks to be about as good as the current free content (Peachy and what Duncan Rhodes used to do), but costs money now. I'll pass thx, but if anyone form GW is reading this I'd like to reiterate my desire to buy a steady stream of Darren Lathan vids, should you ever wish to sell them.
Which was going to have BatReps on it. So why didn't GW go after BatRep channels then?
One, we don't know if they have or not. BatRep channels don't always have fixed release dates. Two, it's entirely possible they have not gotten that far yet. Recalling that they got badly burned on their last mass Cease and Desist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JWBS wrote: Darren Latham's YT channel got nuked today. Ofc he had been inactive for a while due to GW's intent to take this space with Masterclass.
Regarding painting videos, what I’d like to see is videos which tackle different styles of painting. The Eavy Metal style has never appealed to me no matter how well it’s done.
In the context of the discussion, yes. GW hasn't gone after BatRep channels before and as someone has just said several have checked and been told by actual lawyers that GW would find it very difficult to get such a case going.
One, we don't know if they have or not. BatRep channels don't always have fixed release dates. Two, it's entirely possible they have not gotten that far yet. Recalling that they got badly burned on their last mass Cease and Desist.
We know GW hasn't gone after BatRep channels because none of the big BatRep channels or even smaller ones have been C&D'd.
Yes we all knew his channel was being culled to make room for WH+, the question was whether the paid successor would retain the quality of the unpaid predecessor. The answer is a clear "Oh fk no" and I for one am greatly disappointed by this.
Gert wrote: Latham knew his channel was going to be taken down about a year ago, he even posted about it.
We don't know what's in Latham's contract with GW though....
Wow its actually gone .. :(
I'm very glad I managed to download his entire library of content for posterity before it got pulled.
His video on painting black armour has elevated my scheme to the next level. By far the best videos on painting in my opinion. I still see him post on FB though from time to time which is great.
IP rights have nothing to do with DMCA Strikes and Youtube removing Video
You do know that DMCA stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act, right? It's right there in the name.
There's a difference between the actual DMCA and DMCA strikes on Youtube (or other platforms) that host so much content that they can't do it the official way and have processes which are mostly automated system (using digital fingerprints) where people can additionally report infringement (or "infringement", or trolling). It's too much data to handle normally so they act proactively due to DMCA issues. I think it's about legal penalties if they didn't take real DMCA requests seriously so everybody gets thrown under the bus if somebody only asks via their process.
The point is that however youtube is handling this, it's not about the rights. People got all kinds of odd issues with it, like videos of nature/bird singing being blocked by the algorithm or some musicians who get their own songs taken down by random people (sometimes licensor or remixer, or again the algorithm not knowing who the original creator is). The system seems to be rather opaque, confusing, and not intuitive. Youtube creators are complaining for years now about how arbitrary it is, the lack of clarity, and how the lack of customer service people is making it harder to contest false claims against their videos. I think three DMCA strikes, no matter their validity, can take down your whole youtube channel (even if every other video is clear) until it's resolved so creators tend to become paranoid after two strikes because it takes youtube a long time to clear it all up. Youtube's connection to actual copyright laws is lacking until you work through a few layers of it (the first few being automated or algorithmic) and not everybody has the stamina to go through this maze because it can take quite a bit of time.
The hyperbole in the comment you replied to was most probably about something like people fearing that GW might try to get rid of potential competition if, for example, their WH+ numbers after a few months don't look well (like how the animation channels seem to have had issues and how Darren Latham's channel is gone). People are extrapolating from what they see happening in adjacent categories of WH+ content. The question then, if something similar were to happen to battle reports too, would be how many youtube creators would have the stamina to work through the mess that is the youtube system just to get their stuff back online.
Actual copyright shows up somewhere at the very end of all of this, thus the hyperbolic statement (for emphasis, probably) of "IP rights have nothing to do with DMCA Strikes and Youtube removing Video". Yes DMCA has copyright in the name but that's essentially irrelevant because actual copyright is a bit like an afterthought to the whole youtube DMCA process. It's a "guilty until proven innocent" system that hits you in the face with automated systems and general bureaucracy. GW could, if they wanted, cause quite a lot of damage to these channels without actually suffering real DMCA repercussion for false DMCA claims (as they are going through youtube's DMCA system).
All things considered, the initial comment was probably more correct than your correction… despite you being technically correct.
They probably couldn't win an actual court case against most battle rep channels. But there's no doubt that what a lot of battle rep channels do directly contravenes GW's own instructions to the community about what is and isn't allowed re: use of their IP. Now those guidelines are ridiculous nonsense that would never hold up in court...but it's what GW purports to tell people the rules are, what GW hopes people will be fooled into thinking the rules are, and what a sizable portion of the community (see previous threads on this topic) seems to think the rules are. And even if GW couldn't get the channels taken down completely (and youtube is notorious for always taking the side of big companies), they could certainly make their lives difficult by striking them for little violations here and there.
I would be surprised to see them go after batrep channels, right now they have a very cozy relationship with most of them and keep them on side with freebies and insider access, and the free advertising they produce makes GW millions of dollars a year in plastic sales. But GW has surprised me in the past with the stupid things they do...like, you know, shutting down fan animation channels that were basically just free advertising for GW.
Indeed. None of the bat rep channels out there have the resources to really survive a court battle. And GW doesn't have to even take them to court, it could just get youtube to do its bidding, which youtube is usually only too happy to do, and then the onus is basically on the channel itself to bring the court case.
Again, that doesn't mean they will. It would be a monumentally stupid thing for GW to do, the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face. And while it's GW and therefore we can't rule it out...it's hard for me to believe even they would do something so brainless. I've been wrong before, though.
Gert wrote: Latham knew his channel was going to be taken down about a year ago, he even posted about it.
We don't know what's in Latham's contract with GW though....
Wow its actually gone .. :(
I'm very glad I managed to download his entire library of content for posterity before it got pulled.
His video on painting black armour has elevated my scheme to the next level. By far the best videos on painting in my opinion. I still see him post on FB though from time to time which is great.
Any chance you'd be willing to share the lord of blights masterclass?
JWBS wrote: Yes we all knew his channel was being culled to make room for WH+, the question was whether the paid successor would retain the quality of the unpaid predecessor. The answer is a clear "Oh fk no" and I for one am greatly disappointed by this.
But doesn't this kinda say it all re: how little confidence they have in their own premium product? If their videos are good...why would they need to "make room" by culling prior videos? It's basically an admission that they new product isn't offering value.
It's worth noting that many of the bigger channels have their own behind paywall content which is the actual money earner for them.
MWG make their money from their vault membership, now being victim to youtube processes would sting, as it is essentially their marketing, but it wouldn't stop them producing content for their vault and continuing to earn from it.
It's smaller channels that only have youtube that would be hurt by it. To stop MWG they'd most likely have to go into a messy legal battle, that would need to be followed up with other creators after.
As big as GW is, they aren't as big as the music and film industry who can afford multiple legal battles over IP.
In the context of the discussion, yes. GW hasn't gone after BatRep channels before and as someone has just said several have checked and been told by actual lawyers that GW would find it very difficult to get such a case going.
Yeah, mine told me that GW didn't have a legal leg to stand on when they threatened me, but also pointed out that I didn't have the one quarter to one half million dollars laying around to fight the case, no matter how good it was. When dealing with GW, it doesn't matter if you're right or not, only if you can take that sort of hit and keep going. That's what it takes to force people like GW to follow the same rules as the rest of us, fething up and picking a fight with someone who can actually fight back.
So why were they sending out free advance copies of Kill Team to content creators mere days before the launch of Warhammer+?
because this way they have control over the review
No they don't. Go watch Uncle Atom's Kill Team review on Tabletop Minions, or Goobertown Hobbies review of Dominion. The creators can say whatever they like with the product they receive and are under no obligation to play nice and blow kisses at GW product.
Do people use “Kleenex” as a generic term? I’ve not come across that.
In spanish, Kleenex has pretty much replaced the word "pañuelo". We (not me) use it to call paper tissues of every brand because Kleenex is a monopoly here, and it is so ingrained to our daily life that it appears on our dictionary as "clínex".
JWBS wrote: Yes we all knew his channel was being culled to make room for WH+, the question was whether the paid successor would retain the quality of the unpaid predecessor. The answer is a clear "Oh fk no" and I for one am greatly disappointed by this.
But doesn't this kinda say it all re: how little confidence they have in their own premium product? If their videos are good...why would they need to "make room" by culling prior videos? It's basically an admission that they new product isn't offering value.
This is the weirdest thing to me. He built up a 60K subscriber base with a few dozen videos! People clearly responded to his work. Why not have Louise record a new intro and outro for the videos with some expert commentary so the thumbnails all feel similar, but make the really popular content available at the same time. In a world where they're putting up years-old Blood Bowl "How to Play" videos and cinematics to bulk up their library, why not showcase the stuff made by your employee? Masterclass could be an opportunity to showcase a wide variety of talent – film a David Soper project, repurpose one of Richard Grey's videos, use Darren's library etc. – with permission/compensation, of course. Louise's stuff is interesting, and her winged Tzeentch beast was wicked, but her style is so idiosyncratic it's hard to imagine it being the backbone of the entire series.
I just received notice to take down my video of Necron bugs overwhelming a space marine. The problem is that I own no space marines by GW so I used a Lego version. Lego made me take it down for the reason that GW game design and models are inferior to Lego.
I can see this is clearly the wrong place, but just wanted to comment on Warhammer+.
Watched a reasonable amount of the content so far and generally liked it. Enjoyed the first episode of Hammer and Bolter and Angels of Death. Animation could be better, obviously both are pretty stylized, the H&B stuff looked a little cheap but generally worked, I think the battle between the retinues was the low-point as it didn't really flow at all. AoD looks pretty nice but the movement seemed off, especially the lip-sync and general character movements, thinking maybe too few key frames, everything had a slightly jerky\robotic look or something. I enjoyed the stories of both though.
I found the face-painting tutorial interesting, maybe very little there that I wasn't aware of but thought it gave really nice clear demonstrations of how to put it into practice (if I could see well enough these day to actually do that!).
The two battle reports were fine, nice and clear and I thought they explained what was going on really well, certainly far better than the reports in WD these days. Whether I'll watch many more of them in the future, I don't know, think it will depend on what they do to make each report worth watching. If it's just two armies turn up and fight a standard battle each time I suspect it could get pretty repetitive, but if they try and make them more unique and show off particular aspects of the game for each one then could be more interesting. Also, hope they branch out into reports for other games.
Overall though, seemed a positive start, but will have to see how it develops over time. Certainly didn't regret the £4.99.
Tavis75 wrote: I can see this is clearly the wrong place, but just wanted to comment on Warhammer+.
Watched a reasonable amount of the content so far and generally liked it. Enjoyed the first episode of Hammer and Bolter and Angels of Death. Animation could be better, obviously both are pretty stylized, the H&B stuff looked a little cheap but generally worked, I think the battle between the retinues was the low-point as it didn't really flow at all. AoD looks pretty nice but the movement seemed off, especially the lip-sync and general character movements, thinking maybe too few key frames, everything had a slightly jerky\robotic look or something. I enjoyed the stories of both though.
I found the face-painting tutorial interesting, maybe very little there that I wasn't aware of but thought it gave really nice clear demonstrations of how to put it into practice (if I could see well enough these day to actually do that!).
The two battle reports were fine, nice and clear and I thought they explained what was going on really well, certainly far better than the reports in WD these days. Whether I'll watch many more of them in the future, I don't know, think it will depend on what they do to make each report worth watching. If it's just two armies turn up and fight a standard battle each time I suspect it could get pretty repetitive, but if they try and make them more unique and show off particular aspects of the game for each one then could be more interesting. Also, hope they branch out into reports for other games.
Overall though, seemed a positive start, but will have to see how it develops over time. Certainly didn't regret the £4.99.
Having the animations and the battle reps on the same service would be a great opportunity to link the two, maybe do animated series for "fluff" and link to actual batreps (obviously the time it takes to do an animation would mean you would have to record batreps months in advance)
On the value in general, agree that its probably worth the £5 a month if you are already paying for the Ap anyway. Just wish they would let you do power level lists and track crusade stuff in it.
Tavis75 wrote: but if they try and make them more unique and show off particular aspects of the game for each one then could be more interesting.
There are Battle Reports planned for actual battles from the fluff which should be quite interesting. (Starting with the Battle of Iax next Wednesday I believe.)
JB wrote: Hmm, I was hoping to see a thread about Warhammer + and its pros and cons. This thread seems to be about something else entirely.
Well basically it depends on what you want. For now you get access to 4 episodes of animated series of medium-low quality (I enjoy Hammer and Bolter, but YMMV), 2 painting tutorials, a battle report (quite bland and corporate), a "library" with ~50 publications half of which are Warhammer Visions, 10 White Dwarf, the rest are supplements for AoS, 40k and Underworlds (Somewhat recent, but no usable rules that I've seen), and acess to WH40k app (but you still have tu buy the physical codex to access most rules).
In the state it is now I see it more like buying a limited edition model with some moderately useful/entertaining stuff attached to it. Only time will tell if the rest grows to be worth it by itself.
TLDR; want one of the 2 models? Get the subscription. Otherwise it might be wiser to wait and see.
He created a Youtube channel to teach advance painting techniques, most in the 'Eavy Metal style, great production, entertaining and informative. He also works at GWHQ, so he was "encouraged" to shut the channel down. Probably GW believed he was breaching NDA or exclusivity clause from his contract, or his workload changedand was unable to maintain the channel. Anyway, a bit before Warhammer+ was announced he published a video saying he would stop creating new content and close the channel down soon, and he has done when Warhammer+ went live.
We are quite a few to believe there is a link between this and the Masterclass content in WH+ Was it closed down to protect Masterclass? Will he be taking over/collaborating in that instead? In any case his videos will be missed.
Darren Latham works for GW, used to be a 'eavy metal-painter but is now a mini-designer. He had a youtube-channel with painting tutorials that he stopped updating early 2020. Never said why as far as I can recall, but people speculated it had to do with his employer.
While I understand that some are underwhelmed by the animation quality, I find it just fine in an "old school" kind of way, and the story makes up for it, IMO.
If it was just that and the bonus model, I'd be OK. The BatReps and painting stuff is gravy at that point.
There's precedent for going after fan films and animations. Not necessarily legal precedent, but people have done it before, and it's sort of been accepted - it's making content based on someone elses' universe.
You guys talk about "bat reps" like they're some special thing. They're not. They're videos of people playing games. There are millions of such videos all across the gaming space: board games, RPGs, CCGs, minis games... including games owned by companies far bigger and with far more clout than GW. And as far as I'm aware, to date no company has ever gone after someone for posting footage of them playing a game. I can't imagine for a second GW want to be the first to try that. They'd very much be out on their own, and face a backlash not just from their own community (god knows, they get one of those every three days) but the entire physical gaming playthrough community on Twitch and YouTube and elsewhere.
As someone already mentioned, it's like when Nintendo first went after video game let's plays. And I think they had far more of a point, as a playthrough of a narrative led, on rails video game is arguably closer to a film, in a way that video of a board or minis game isn't. It doesn't spoil anything. It doesn't impact their brand (unless they're doing something weird like playing another system using GW minis).
It would be a hell of a flex to go after bat reps, in a way that going after fan animations and even video game mods is not.
Plus, Battle Reports are using your product as you intended it to be used - for playing battles.
Fan animations and films are different, because as we found with the German ones, different IP laws in different countries can mean very different things.
There’s also the risk that a fan film can damage your IP. Hypothetically, and absolute not saying anyone came even close to this? Imagine a 40K fan film with exceptionally graphic violence of An Adult Nature, and the sort of Pearl clutching One Million Moms might attempt off the back of such?
Battle Reports can’t really do that sort of damage. Even if the players are foul mouthed, that’s just them being foul mouthed, rather than an indictment of the game or it’s manufacturer.
deano2099 wrote: There's precedent for going after fan films and animations. Not necessarily legal precedent, but people have done it before, and it's sort of been accepted - it's making content based on someone elses' universe.
You guys talk about "bat reps" like they're some special thing. They're not. They're videos of people playing games. There are millions of such videos all across the gaming space: board games, RPGs, CCGs, minis games... including games owned by companies far bigger and with far more clout than GW. And as far as I'm aware, to date no company has ever gone after someone for posting footage of them playing a game. I can't imagine for a second GW want to be the first to try that. They'd very much be out on their own, and face a backlash not just from their own community (god knows, they get one of those every three days) but the entire physical gaming playthrough community on Twitch and YouTube and elsewhere.
As someone already mentioned, it's like when Nintendo first went after video game let's plays. And I think they had far more of a point, as a playthrough of a narrative led, on rails video game is arguably closer to a film, in a way that video of a board or minis game isn't. It doesn't spoil anything. It doesn't impact their brand (unless they're doing something weird like playing another system using GW minis).
It would be a hell of a flex to go after bat reps, in a way that going after fan animations and even video game mods is not.
Except as you yourself mention, Nintendo did go after Let's Plays for a time. By the same token, if there's a company who would be stupid and petty enough to take aim at batrep channels because they thought it would redirect their audiences towards subscribing to Warhammer+ For Exclusive Warhammer(tm) Battle Reports(tm) it would absolutely be GW. Hell, if there was a fanbase would who go along with it and find a way to justify the decision, it would be Games Workshop's hordes of cultists.
As people have said, it's not so much the legal precedent so much as fighting Youtube strikes and the willingness to actually bother taking GW to court. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't really see what the difference is between a fan-film maker having a Patreon and battle report youtubers having one? Hell, at least the fan films have all been free for public consumption, whilst a few of the bigger batrep channels actually hide half of their reports behind paywalls. The white knight like to shriek that the fanimators were making money off someone else's IP via donations, but isn't that exactly what battle report channels are doing playing with GW's toys?
In the short term I think the influencers still getting their freebies suggests they're safe. If those dry up however, that's when I'd start looking for a new job if I ran one of those channels.
Again, we’re seeing scaremongering from those with an axe to grind with GW.
They’ve made no moves to remove other battle reports. At all. Believe me, this is Dakka. If they had, we would know, because again those with an axe to grind would most definitely let us know,
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Again, we’re seeing scaremongering from those with an axe to grind with GW.
They’ve made no moves to remove other battle reports. At all. Believe me, this is Dakka. If they had, we would know, because again those with an axe to grind would most definitely let us know,
No they haven't, but there's now a precedent for going after fan content which begs the question "but will they go after X next?"
I'm sure if they did, the GW Defence Force would be quick to rally around them as always though and remind us those nasty battle report channels and painters deserved it.
Do you not think that given they went after Fan Animations before Warhammer+ launched they might, just might have gone after Battle Reports at the same time?
I get you’re constantly trying to paint GW in the worse possible light, but with no sign whatsoever they’ve any intention of taking down other Battle Reports, this time you’ve got nothing?
I’ll gladly eat my words if I turn out to be wrong of course. But if they were gonna do it, why haven’t they done it thus far?
Bad optics in the short term? Not feeling they have enough Battle report content (two) to justify it yet?
I'm not saying they will - I don't think it's the minority opinion that it would be an incredibly moronic decision, not that it's ever stopped GW in the past - I'm just saying it would not surprise me in the slightest.
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't really see what the difference is between a fan-film maker having a Patreon and battle report youtubers having one? Hell, at least the fan films have all been free for public consumption, whilst a few of the bigger batrep channels actually hide half of their reports behind paywalls. The white knight like to shriek that the fanimators were making money off someone else's IP via donations, but isn't that exactly what battle report channels are doing playing with GW's toys?
Pejorative and biased language aside there is very much a difference between a batrep and the animations we've seen taken down. The fundamental difference is using a product for its intended purpose (batrep) and recreating or using trademarked and/or copyrighted material (fan animation). That distinction matters.
Of course GW could try to go after batrep channels. They can try to do anything they want and current IP laws certainly heavily favour companies with lots of money. However, I suspect they'd see a much bigger backlash from creators outside their own sphere of influence because a ruling in a case like that would have implications for boardgames, RPGs, Let's Plays and any number of other channels that demonstrate products. There is some precedent for Let's Plays being taken down but these were almost always to do with the videos playing licenced music from the games where the licence didn't permit it, rather than for playing the game itself. Several developers even include a streaming mode in their video games that removes any of that licenced music.
If they go after Battle Reports, it would be for the reason about using 3rd party bits for terrain, models or gameplay without talking about those in the video drectly
in a simple way, GW has their very strict rules for official events and can argue that battle reports that are not going by those rules or making clear that they are using non-GW stuff are hurting their IP/Trademarks
This is also a reason why they would want to remove them
Not only to get people to WH+ but to prevent people from seeing what is available outside the GW Bubble
Why haven't they done it already?
Don't know, as I also don't know why they waited so long to go after 3D File creators
If it would have been important, they could have already done it 3-4 years ago to make a point and being clear what people can and cannot do
It is just that GW is now more active regarding their IP protection than 3 years ago, for whatever reason, so no one knows what they will do next
Except as you yourself mention, Nintendo did go after Let's Plays for a time. By the same token, if there's a company who would be stupid and petty enough to take aim at batrep channels because they thought it would redirect their audiences towards subscribing to Warhammer+ For Exclusive Warhammer(tm) Battle Reports(tm) it would absolutely be GW. Hell, if there was a fanbase would who go along with it and find a way to justify the decision, it would be Games Workshop's hordes of cultists.
Nintendo were one of the big players in that industry though. GW are very much not, compared to your Asmodees and WotCs. I'm not saying they definitely wouldn't do it - just compared to going after fan films it's a huge flex.
The other reason I think battle reports are safe is because it's hard for them to negatively impact GW. Fan animation and films can be good for the brand, but there's also the more satirical ones that aren't exactly in love with GW. If you're making hours long battle reports using GW models and systems, chances are you love GW stuff and are portraying it in a good way. It'd be hard to make a battle report that reflects negatively on the game, and if you make one of those, you probably won't make another as it's no fun.
I mean, if GW are going to issue takedowns with no legal basis on channels just because they're showing images of their content, I sort of feel like they might go after the professional GW-hating YouTubers first? Before the ones filming themselves enjoying playing with the product? Because those channels use images from GW's website and stuff too, it's always on screen while they explain why it's gak. The legal defense is the same as battle reports: fair use.
Battle Reports aren’t official events, and no more bound by GW’s official event rules than any tournament which isn’t sponsored by GW.
I really don’t think GW particularly care what’s outside of their bubble. They’re still the biggest fish in the pond, with the widest online reach and customer engagement.
Plus, it’s hard to see that as a justified basis - unless they were specifically sponsoring that show (for instance, if I was sponsored by Sony to poorly play PS4 games, and I slipped in an X-Box game, that would be a problem. But they could nowt against me without that sponsorship. Even then, it would need to be a contract stipulation).
Likewise, WWE can’t go after Wrestling channels also discussing AEW, AJP and Impact in the same show, because there’s no implied exclusivity.
As an independent business or an individual, GW have absolutely no basis to pull content just because their competitors are also shown off. If there was, do you really think they’d leave FLGS alone in that respect?
Depends how you define the industry. GW are THE name in wargames, to the point that when I tell anyone outside of wargames that I play wargames a lot of them will say "oh, you mean warhammer right?".
kirotheavenger wrote: Depends how you define the industry. GW are THE name in wargames, to the point that when I tell anyone outside of wargames that I play wargames a lot of them will say "oh, you mean warhammer right?".
But when it comes to "filming yourself playing a game" then GW "bat reps" are barely significant. We keep saying "bat reps" to make it sound like a special wargaming thing. It's not. It's the exact same thing as someone filming themselves playing Magic, Gloomhaven or Pathfinder.
kirotheavenger wrote: Depends how you define the industry. GW are THE name in wargames, to the point that when I tell anyone outside of wargames that I play wargames a lot of them will say "oh, you mean warhammer right?".
But when it comes to "filming yourself playing a game" then GW "bat reps" are barely significant. We keep saying "bat reps" to make it sound like a special wargaming thing. It's not. It's the exact same thing as someone filming themselves playing Magic, Gloomhaven or Pathfinder.
People aren't saying batreps to make it "sound like a special wargaming thing." People are saying batreps because the specific topic of the current discussion is battle reports and it is quicker to type slang than a whole word.
It is a fair point that people filming themselves playing Warhammer is similar to people filming themselves playing other games though.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Again, we’re seeing scaremongering from those with an axe to grind with GW.
They’ve made no moves to remove other battle reports. At all. Believe me, this is Dakka. If they had, we would know, because again those with an axe to grind would most definitely let us know,
No they haven't, but there's now a precedent for going after fan content which begs the question "but will they go after X next?"
I'm sure if they did, the GW Defence Force would be quick to rally around them as always though and remind us those nasty battle report channels and painters deserved it.
Every company has their Corporate Defense Force. Once they've decided that your words are a threat to the company (whether that is true or not), there's nothing you can do to convince them otherwise.
CDF finger-wagging about fearmongering aside, the consensus seems to be that if GW did go after battle reports it would be an uphill battle and a bad PR move.
On the flip side: GW has done things like this in the past, and it could still be damaging for batrep channels to deal with YouTube's takedown policy and the cost of defending their business in court.
Re: GW targeting batreps, I have to imagine that they would lose that court case and that established legal precedents would apply to it. That would be like EA suing Twitch to stop them from streaming EA published games on the platform, or Activision suing IGN to stop them from publishing reviews of their games, or hell - Disney suing the New York Times to stop them from publishing film reviews. No court would agree to it.
ImAGeek wrote: They literally send review copies of games to channels that do battle reports, including kill team very recently. I don’t think they’d do that if they had an issue with battle reports (considering at least one channel is doing a KT battle report series).
I hate to bring up, you know, GW's history and all, but that doesn't mean anything. I literally got a copy of one of the 40kRPG books in the mail to review the day we got a cease and desist letter demanding we stop showing pictures of their products.
With GW, if you assume logic, reason, or basic competence, you're already failed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: No-one still been able to name animation gw shut down?
Effectively, all of them. According to several of the animators that GW approached, they were given the option to keep animating, but do it on Warhammer+ or cease and desist.
Theres at least one animator who turned down GWs request and was allowed to keep their content online.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Again, we’re seeing scaremongering from those with an axe to grind with GW.
They’ve made no moves to remove other battle reports. At all. Believe me, this is Dakka. If they had, we would know, because again those with an axe to grind would most definitely let us know,
No they haven't, but there's now a precedent for going after fan content which begs the question "but will they go after X next?"
I'm sure if they did, the GW Defence Force would be quick to rally around them as always though and remind us those nasty battle report channels and painters deserved it.
This post pretty much sums up this entire exchange.
Invent a problem with no evidence except assumptions, speculation and false equivalencies. Then, dismiss half the Dakka community as the “GW Defence Force”.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Again, we’re seeing scaremongering from those with an axe to grind with GW.
They’ve made no moves to remove other battle reports. At all. Believe me, this is Dakka. If they had, we would know, because again those with an axe to grind would most definitely let us know,
No they haven't, but there's now a precedent for going after fan content which begs the question "but will they go after X next?"
I'm sure if they did, the GW Defence Force would be quick to rally around them as always though and remind us those nasty battle report channels and painters deserved it.
This post pretty much sums up this entire exchange.
Invent a problem with no evidence except assumptions, speculation and false equivalencies. Then, dismiss half the Dakka community as the “GW Defence Force”.
It’s pretty pathetic really.
There’s also nobody saying that if GW did go after such things it wouldn’t be a Richard Move.
It never occurs to 90% of the hysteria crowd that they live in countries with statutory law, and that made up reasoning like, "If they can do X, then next they can do Y!" so fundamentally misunderstands the legal system that it is not just pointless to do, but leaves you further down the wrong road than you would have been if you just didn't try.
I don't know how it all works in TV court, but in real court, actually no, most lawyers won't do anything, lie about anything, ignore the laws they know will be applicable when they wind up before a judge. Sure, they do make stupid mistakes and overly aggressive mistakes. And thanks to that little, cheap to hire lawyers in small towns beat big, expensive corporate lawyers all the time in court. Despite the false idea that being rich means you just automatically win in front of a judge so common on the internet.
Outsiders should judge this debate on who's been wrong consistently. The outrage mob said the Youtube community would be destroyed. They were wrong. They said battle reports would get C&Ds. They were wrong. They said lore channels would get C&Ds. They were wrong. They said game modders would get shut down. They were wrong. And of course they're consistently wrong, look at how little research they think they need to do to understand the legal system... none! Just making it all up as they go.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It’s more the baseless scaremongering from those with an axe to grind, and the entirely manufactured outrage that results.
As I said in an earlier post, ifGW do go after online battle reports in the end? I’ll happily eat my words.
But right now, as it stands? It’s just an attempt to create a scene where there is no scene.
I'll admit that calling people "Defense Force" is unlikely to bring them around to a certain way of thinking.
On the gripping hand, nobody is trying to create a scene. People are simply expressing a concern and offering their reasons for that concern.
It is entirely possible to just have an opinion that GW might do to batreps what they did to fan animation without having an ulterior desire to set Games Workshop's house on fire.
It is also possible to think it is very unlikely that Games Workshop will do that.
On the gripping hand, nobody is trying to create a scene. People are simply expressing a concern and offering their reasons for that concern.
It is entirely possible to just have an opinion that GW might do to batreps what they did to fan animation without having an ulterior desire to set Games Workshop's house on fire.
It is also possible to think it is very unlikely that Games Workshop will do that.
Except that "expressed concern" is repeated ad nauseam for quite a while now, since the buzz first about fan animations then about modders. Both topic were shut, by the way, and for good reason : the same people kept repeating the same things over and over, even when proved wrong.
They're just doing it again here. At this point, it's no more a concern. It's indeed trying to make a scene out of nothing, since they don't have anything else right at hand to keep pushing their negative view of GW, no matter GW will do.
Trying to build an outrage out of assumptions is showing that you really have nothing else.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It’s more the baseless scaremongering from those with an axe to grind, and the entirely manufactured outrage that results.
As I said in an earlier post, ifGW do go after online battle reports in the end? I’ll happily eat my words.
But right now, as it stands? It’s just an attempt to create a scene where there is no scene.
I'll admit that calling people "Defense Force" is unlikely to bring them around to a certain way of thinking.
On the gripping hand, nobody is trying to create a scene. People are simply expressing a concern and offering their reasons for that concern.
It is entirely possible to just have an opinion that GW might do to batreps what they did to fan animation without having an ulterior desire to set Games Workshop's house on fire.
It is also possible to think it is very unlikely that Games Workshop will do that.
You’re clearly a kind and generous spirit to ascribe such benign motives to the ones expressing “concern”.
All I’m seeing is the same small crowd of very vocal people who never let an opportunity pass to try to paint everything GW does, says and releases in the worst light possible. In the absence of any actual facts, these same people will just speculate and invent drama for the sake of drama.
On the gripping hand, nobody is trying to create a scene. People are simply expressing a concern and offering their reasons for that concern.
It is entirely possible to just have an opinion that GW might do to batreps what they did to fan animation without having an ulterior desire to set Games Workshop's house on fire.
It is also possible to think it is very unlikely that Games Workshop will do that.
Except that "expressed concern" is repeated ad nauseam for quite a while now, since the buzz first about fan animations then about modders. Both topic were shut, by the way, and for good reason : the same people kept repeating the same things over and over, even when proved wrong.
They're just doing it again here. At this point, it's no more a concern. It's indeed trying to make a scene out of nothing, since they don't have anything right at hand to keep pushing their negative view of GW, no matter GW will do.
There certainly are people who just want to say bad things about Games Workshop, but they aren't the majority. You could take people at their word and not invent some kind of howling mob out of disconnected strangers on the Internet.
There certainly are people who just want to say bad things about Games Workshop, but they aren't the majority. You could take people at their word and not invent some kind of howling mob out of disconnected strangers on the Internet.
Vocal minority on the internet is still vocal, sadly, and this is the case here on Dakkadakka.
This topic was about Warhammer + and here we are to talk about this unbased off topic again. Because of always the same people. Better to ignore them and let the storm pass...until the next one, made up or not.
There certainly are people who just want to say bad things about Games Workshop, but they aren't the majority. You could take people at their word and not invent some kind of howling mob out of disconnected strangers on the Internet.
Vocal minority on the internet is still vocal, sadly, and this is the case here on Dakkadakka.
This topic was about Warhammer + and here we are to talk about this unbased off topic again. Because of always the same people. Better to ignore them and let the storm pass...until the next one, made up or not.
Once GW releases their next batch of W+ content people will probably talk about that instead. Is it supposed to be a weekly thing?
A question for the subscribers what is the overall attitude of Battle reports and painting tuts etc... Is it like "lego everything is awesome" like we have seen on twitch streams?
NAVARRO wrote: A question for the subscribers what is the overall attitude of Battle reports and painting tuts etc... Is it like "lego everything is awesome" like we have seen on twitch streams?
I really enjoyed both painting videos. They were certainly different to anything GW has produced before, but that doesn't mean different to YouTube content already available.
However, the production value was the highest I've seen and Louise is actually a very good presenter.
The pale skin tutorial was essentially one of Darren Latham's videos but there was some interesting snippets that weren't in his - the 3 warm/cool colour zones on the face for example.
The wet blending one however was, in my opinion, very good and I learnt a lot.
Interesting that she's using a wet palette throughout as well, not something I actually thought we would see on a GW video.
I enjoyed the battle report. An hour is exactly how long I want a report to be, and again the production value was the highest I have seen. The models and terrain were gorgeous which also makes them more appealing.
My biggest gripe though was that it was almost 100% shot from a top down camera angle. I would have preferred some more angles so we could get a sense of the terrain, cover, LoS etc.
There were some nice tactical insights from the players too but I thought they could have gone more in depth.
I also thought the format was very similar to Tabletop Tactics.
Patrick was a regular at my FLGS and is supposedly a very good player and a thoroughly nice chap so I am hoping he gets to go into more detail in upcoming reports.
So in short bith the painting videos and battle reports weren't ground breaking in terms of format and content, but they had high production values and I really enjoyed them. I guess if it's not broken don't fix it.
The wet blending one however was, in my opinion, very good and I learnt a lot.
Interesting that she's using a wet palette throughout as well, not something I actually thought we would see on a GW video.
I enjoyed the battle report. An hour is exactly how long I want a report to be, and again the production value was the highest I have seen. The models and terrain were gorgeous which also makes them more appealing.
.
Besides wet palette the battle reports had terrain scratch build not available from gw and dice tray gw doesn't sell. So much for battle report terrain just being stock terrain
And yea battle reports were surprisinply decent and easy to follow. I wouldn't pay just for them but does add nice value along rest. With model i want and voucher price for just rest isn't that bad.
Aos suffered from horrible deployment mistake. Not that unreasonable with small armies but still...seemed pretty bad rookie mistake to make.
I'm a bit of a moaner of GW things at times, but I've subbed to W+. Mainly because I already paid for the 40K app and just unsubbed from the useless AoS app (I subbed for my only AoS stuff - Dominion - which isn't in it). When the new AoS app is released, basically for £1 more a month, I get W+ content.
My usual subs payment for the 40k app went out the day before I adjusted the subscription to the W+ app. I figured that was a £1.99 loss, but to my surprise and without asking, GW refunded it the day after subscribing to W+. Not a massive thing, but 'evil' GW could have kept it. A nice touch I thought.
Anyway, my first impressions... I'm not particularly interested in the back catalogue of White Dwarfs (or Visions). I think I've probably had and recycled most issues since Issue 91 back in Summer 1987 (One of the few I hung onto). The WD's I would like to see would be ones from this era. When things like D&D adventures, Traveller RPG scenarios etc were in it. They would be a real treat, but we know that if GW ever went back this far, all non-GW stuff would be removed anyway.
The videos. I enjoyed the face painting masterclass - I've yet to watch the wet blending one. Nothing I suppose that couldn't be found elsewhere on the net, but still good to watch.
The Angels of Death however, was great. I'm really looking forward to the next episode. Great stuff. (Please don't tell me it was a one-off).
I'm just starting the AoS Battle report, looks well filmed and set up so far.
For the new content we’ll get each month, it’s basically a live action White Dwarf, with the added perk that you don’t need to hunt down back issues.
I think it was a mistake to consider it an Amazon or Netflix rival, or indeed for GW to have kind of presented it as that, as it created incorrect associations in the would be customer base.
I’m enjoying what I’m seeing, and as possibly the most reluctant painter you’ll ever meet (it’s been proven to be easier to get a fussy, over tired toddler to eat their greens than get me to paint), I’m actually kinda tempted to try to replicate the Pale Skin Masterclass.
Thanks for the reports and opinions guys It does help us non subscribers to be on the loop and if its worth dip in.
One o the main reasons I stopped looking at GW live streams was that the content was boring and not very well presented at all.
Glad to see they are moving away from that.
I do echo comment about too much top down. Not all but that's something i hope they improve on in future.
It's nothing earthshattering but surprisingly solid. If you just want battle reports something like mwg is better quality and more per month(likely) but there's also rest of stuff. And if you want model and/or was subscriber of 40k app(and felt it was worth it) then i would say this is worth the money.
With the 40k battle report, it seemed that some of the voiced parts explaining manoevers and dice rolls were inserted a couple of seconds too late. Nothing too bad but probably something they should look at to keep the events more pleasant to follow.
Having never watched a YT battle report, so had no preconceived notions, I enjoyed the AoS battle report. Production quality was excellent, it went through at a nice pace and didn’t feel slow, explained rules and such nicely and the players were entertaining. Just under an hour runtime worked.
I like many others I am considering this a £15 quid for a year trial. I love the Vindicare and would happy buy it anyway for say £25, and the £10 voucher I’ll put to good use.
MaxT wrote: Having never watched a YT battle report, so had no preconceived notions, I enjoyed the AoS battle report. Production quality was excellent, it went through at a nice pace and didn’t feel slow, explained rules and such nicely and the players were entertaining. Just under an hour runtime worked.
I like many others I am considering this a £15 quid for a year trial. I love the Vindicare and would happy buy it anyway for say £25, and the £10 voucher I’ll put to good use.
Yup, for me it's $60 less the $16 voucher and $36 for the app subscription. So I'm paying $18 and getting a free model for a 1-year subscription. If I don't like it then I'm good with that choice.
tneva82 wrote: Last time i watched it(mithin month" lt was subscriber only chat.
Pretty sure it was temporal corona thing but as gw been back to reasonably normal so too is subscribtion if you want to chat
Sub-only chat was implemented after the first Twitch preview stream they did because they got spammed by hate messages constantly for near enough the full hour by people that weren't subscribers.
The channel itself and content remain free to view though
No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
Anyone intrigued that Black Library doesn’t get a look-in with this? Thought at first they perhaps are too profitable to give anything away but then they do a Humble Bundle most years. A free ebook each month with maybe some book club content- interview with the author, related lore videos - would round it out nicely.
deano2099 wrote: Anyone intrigued that Black Library doesn’t get a look-in with this?
My guess is a technical / usability issue. The Warhammer Vault site is incredibly slow to load the books, there's no bookmark feature and the interface is awful (locked down Adobe PDF). I wouldn't want to try to read a novel on it.
I mean GW has been pretty clear that more stuff will be added and advertising every single possible thing is also not a feasible task. If Warhammer + promised 50 different shows then only delivered 30 since 50 was actually an unrealistic goal, the people would rage and whine about being lied to. Better that it's left ambiguous since it can allow the creative team to come up with new ideas if and when the inspiration strikes.
deano2099 wrote: Anyone intrigued that Black Library doesn’t get a look-in with this? Thought at first they perhaps are too profitable to give anything away but then they do a Humble Bundle most years. A free ebook each month with maybe some book club content- interview with the author, related lore videos - would round it out nicely.
In part it might be because most of the BL provisions are made for other systems - eg the ebooks for e-readers and GW wants Warhammer+ to be a subscription service not a purchasing service. So the BL books just might not fit that model for GW. It might also be that it will eat into the profits that the BL books generate which might well harm BL's ability to command resources within GW to put toward further publications. BL works as it is and whilst we might well see some books or audio books appear on Warhammer+; I just don't feel that the BL content has any pressure to be there.
Perhaps we might see some limited release stuff - like the lore and art books - get some exposure there as they are more collector works to start with and BL has always had a more spotty publishing rate with them.
kodos wrote: If they go after Battle Reports, it would be for the reason about using 3rd party bits for terrain, models or gameplay without talking about those in the video drectly
in a simple way, GW has their very strict rules for official events and can argue that battle reports that are not going by those rules or making clear that they are using non-GW stuff are hurting their IP/Trademarks
This is also a reason why they would want to remove them
Not only to get people to WH+ but to prevent people from seeing what is available outside the GW Bubble
Why haven't they done it already?
Don't know, as I also don't know why they waited so long to go after 3D File creators
If it would have been important, they could have already done it 3-4 years ago to make a point and being clear what people can and cannot do
It is just that GW is now more active regarding their IP protection than 3 years ago, for whatever reason, so no one knows what they will do next
Could you imagine at the beginning of every single GW game batrep is a 5 min ad for all the cool stuff they are using.
This is the only outcome for something like this.
“GW has sent us a legal letter stating we must tell you that they don’t sell this mat, and that if you want it you have to go here.”
“All the bases are supplied via this website, terrain you get here.”
JWBS wrote: No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
So somehow i hacked their system without even knowing it,? Seeing i watched their streams without paying before that article.
Yo, this is actually affordable in Japan, and tbh the voucher and the assassin (I prefer the store one, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna fork out over 5000 yen for one clampack monopose mini) are pretty attractive tie-ins.
Something I'm really curious, for those of you subbed, is what is the White Dwarf library like? I was assuming they'd have loads of old back issues, which tbh I'd be really interested in, however in the recent promo on Warcom, they were talking about Gathering Storm like they were relics of the past, when... I remember buying them not that long ago (and they weren't that great tbh...) is there more than that, or does the written content really only go back a few years? Cheers!
JWBS wrote: No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
So somehow i hacked their system without even knowing it,? Seeing i watched their streams without paying before that article.
No, you could watch streams without being a subscriber, but before that article you couldn’t watch any past streams later without being a subscriber. Now all their videos are available to watch without subscribing.
JWBS wrote: No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
So somehow i hacked their system without even knowing it,? Seeing i watched their streams without paying before that article.
No, you could watch streams without being a subscriber, but before that article you couldn’t watch any past streams later without being a subscriber. Now all their videos are available to watch without subscribing.
I take my hat to any gentleman going into the adventure of watching those streams though. Probably some of the most boring and quite irritating content on twitch
JWBS wrote: No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
So somehow i hacked their system without even knowing it,? Seeing i watched their streams without paying before that article.
No, you could watch streams without being a subscriber, but before that article you couldn’t watch any past streams later without being a subscriber. Now all their videos are available to watch without subscribing.
I take my hat to any gentleman going into the adventure of watching those streams though. Probably some of the most boring and quite irritating content on twitch
To be fair they might be ideal background noise for some people to paint with - not interesting enough to take you eyes from your minis but maybe worth occasionally glancing up at (personally I'd still go with a decent podcast every time though).
JWBS wrote: No I believe they had not only their vods but even their livestreams behind a paywall (a model that an exceptionally low number of Twitch streamers choose, it's pretty much unheard of really, but bizarrely it's what they decided to do). Like, they expected people to pay to see a couple of WD guys chat about how great the latest warhammer releases are while they painted up some genestealers.
So somehow i hacked their system without even knowing it,? Seeing i watched their streams without paying before that article.
No, you could watch streams without being a subscriber, but before that article you couldn’t watch any past streams later without being a subscriber. Now all their videos are available to watch without subscribing.
I take my hat to any gentleman going into the adventure of watching those streams though. Probably some of the most boring and quite irritating content on twitch
To be fair they might be ideal background noise for some people to paint with - not interesting enough to take you eyes from your minis but maybe worth occasionally glancing up at (personally I'd still go with a decent podcast every time though).
It was fun in the early days. Wade was really the lynchpin – he brought high-energy to every stream and was often the one who focused on making the audio content worth listening to by reading old lore bits and throwing comments to the panel. I've dipped in more recently and they do a better job of showing the painting but the chemistry is just not there.
streetsamurai wrote: I wonder what are the revenue expectation and the dead point for warhammer+ ?
Id be surprised if they manage to have more than a 50k subscribers (but what do i know)
They would have been crazy to budget that high.
But unless they got something crazy in the works, they probably only need about 5000 subs a month. Right now they probably pushing out a bit extra, but a lot of the content they can do in house as part of other things as well to spread costs.
Hosting is pricy, but there are affordable options there as well nowadays and it is way less effort to scale up and down on demand than it was in the passed.
Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
streetsamurai wrote: I wonder what are the revenue expectation and the dead point for warhammer+ ?
Id be surprised if they manage to have more than a 50k subscribers (but what do i know)
They would have been crazy to budget that high.
But unless they got something crazy in the works, they probably only need about 5000 subs a month. Right now they probably pushing out a bit extra, but a lot of the content they can do in house as part of other things as well to spread costs.
Hosting is pricy, but there are affordable options there as well nowadays and it is way less effort to scale up and down on demand than it was in the passed.
To be honest 5k sounds way lower than it’ll be. You have to remember how many people are in the hobby. And particularly how many once you look past the complainers of forums and stuff.
Maybe 50k could be a bit high, I’m not sure, but I think it’ll be nearer that than 5k..
The live (free) preview shows got in excess of 40,000 viewers as a live show. the dominion preview has 538k+ views and the 40K codex preview 590k since the initial broadcast (probably a lot of repeat views on both). The YouTube channel has 492k subs (again free) with the highest viewed video at 3.9 million views (40K 9th Ed cinematic trailer). Hard to tell how all that translates into paid subs though. There are plenty of GW Twitch streams with less than 1,000 views.
streetsamurai wrote: I wonder what are the revenue expectation and the dead point for warhammer+ ?
Id be surprised if they manage to have more than a 50k subscribers (but what do i know)
They would have been crazy to budget that high.
But unless they got something crazy in the works, they probably only need about 5000 subs a month. Right now they probably pushing out a bit extra, but a lot of the content they can do in house as part of other things as well to spread costs.
Hosting is pricy, but there are affordable options there as well nowadays and it is way less effort to scale up and down on demand than it was in the passed.
To be honest 5k sounds way lower than it’ll be. You have to remember how many people are in the hobby. And particularly how many once you look past the complainers of forums and stuff.
Maybe 50k could be a bit high, I’m not sure, but I think it’ll be nearer that than 5k..
Not that I know a whole lot about animation and producing video costs, but 25K a month doesn't sound like it would cover the costs for Angels of Death, let alone everything else.
streetsamurai wrote: I wonder what are the revenue expectation and the dead point for warhammer+ ?
Id be surprised if they manage to have more than a 50k subscribers (but what do i know)
They would have been crazy to budget that high.
But unless they got something crazy in the works, they probably only need about 5000 subs a month. Right now they probably pushing out a bit extra, but a lot of the content they can do in house as part of other things as well to spread costs.
Hosting is pricy, but there are affordable options there as well nowadays and it is way less effort to scale up and down on demand than it was in the passed.
To be honest 5k sounds way lower than it’ll be. You have to remember how many people are in the hobby. And particularly how many once you look past the complainers of forums and stuff.
Maybe 50k could be a bit high, I’m not sure, but I think it’ll be nearer that than 5k..
Not that I know a whole lot about animation and producing video costs, but 25K a month doesn't sound like it would cover the costs for Angels of Death, let alone everything else.
Animation can be a truly magical way to get your message across. It is the perfect way to engage your audience and present information in a clear and entertaining way. There are so many different styles of animation that you can tap into, from infographics and character animation to explainer videos and telling stories with exciting, out-of-this-world characters and visuals.
But how much does animation cost? If you’ve been sending out requests for quotes for animation, you’ve likely received a wide range of prices. So how do you know what you should expect to pay to receive a great looking final video? The bottom line is that this is a tricky question to answer. There are many factors involved that can impact the cost of animation. In this post, we’ll walk you through some of the key factors that can influence animated video production cost and show you some examples in various price ranges so you can know what to expect.
Creative Humans makes it easy to find and hire top video production studios and freelancers. Create a Free Account to get started.
Animation Costs
With so many factors involved that can impact the final price, it’s not easy to nail down an average cost for animation. Two videos of the same length could have wildly different prices depending on the style of animation being used, how fluid and refined the animation looks, and the level of expertise of the artist working on the spot. That said, here are some basic price ranges you can expect for a one-minute animated video:
- $3,000-$7,000 Per Minute. Videos in this price range would be considered low budget. You should expect to get some very simple 2D animation. Animation at this level is very basic, the fluidity of the movements are often a little jerky looking, and the characters unrefined. The artist may use stock elements to keep costs low. Be aware that, for projects with smaller budgets, the studio may not offer services like scripting, voice over and music. Those might be considered add on costs.
- $10,000-$20,000 Per Minute. This price range is the minimum for a professionally produced animated video. At this rate, the animation studio will deliver scripting, voice over, art direction, character animation, advanced transitions, and more.
- $20,000-$50,000 Per Minute. In this range, animation studios will deliver high quality videos that can incorporate more advanced animation effects. This is also the price range where 3D animation begins to become feasible.
- $50,000-$100,000+ Per Minute. Around $50,000 is when you can begin to expect broadcast quality production values. These projects hold nothing back, with the studios often providing full animation services from concept development and scripting to 2D/3D animation, advanced lighting effects, and more.
Scroll down to see some visual examples of animated videos in various price ranges from Creative Humans!
Key Factors Influencing Animation Cost
As we mentioned, there are many factors involved that influence the final cost of your animation project. Let’s take a look:
1. Animation Style
The style of animation is another important consideration when determining cost. The more time consuming and refined the animation, the more expensive it is going to cost you. Here’s what you need to know:
- 2D Animation. 2D animation is generally going to be the most affordable style of animation offered. It’s less time consuming than stop motion or 3D animation. Within 2D animation, typography and graphic vector style is more affordable, while shaded or character hand-inked animation is more costly.
- Illustration. Illustration is a visual explanation of a text. The designer will take your script and interpretation of a text in his/her vision. An illustrator often produces the imagery themselves as opposed to a graphic designer who will use other tools such as images, graphic forms, and words to relay her message to the viewer.
- Motion Graphics (Typography and Animated Logos). This style can be both 2D and 3D, and you'll see examples everywhere in commercials, explainer videos, sporting events, the news and other TV productions. Character animation is generally outside the scope of motion graphics, but many of the core animation principles apply to motion graphics too.
- Infographics. Infographics are graphic visual representations of information, data, or knowledge intended to present information quickly and clearly. This style is often used to help break down big data and make it more easily understood. Financial institutions and government agencies are often a fan of this style of work.
- Stop Motion Animation (Claymation, Cutouts, Action Figures, Puppets). Stop motion is a fun and playful way to tell your story. It involves the artist taking physical items, like toys for example, and moving them and photographing them frame by frame. The costs will vary based upon what is being animated. For instance, if the item needs to be built from scratch out of clay, that will cost more than if the item is pre-built, like a toy race car or a cutout of an image. The price to produce a stop motion video can range from anywhere from 15k-150k. See examples here.
- 3D Animation. 3D animation is a very impressive style of animation. The good news is that as the technology behind the animation has been improving, the costs have been dropping. Simple product renderings are less expensive, while character models and Disney/Pixar style 3D animation run on the high end. The price to produce an animated 3D video can range from anywhere from 10k-300k. See examples here.
2. Services Requested
Many professional animation studios will offer services beyond simply animating your video. These may include:
- Concepting & Strategy. Do you have an idea for your video already, or will you be relying on the studio to produce the concept and strategy for your project?
- Scripting & Storyboarding. Do you have a script, or does it need to be written? If not, that can add to the cost of your video. Similarly, storyboarding can be a resource-intensive task requiring the involvement of a creative director, concept artist, and illustrators.
- Voice Over. Professional voice talent and recording will add to your video cost. Of course, you always want to ensure your videos will feature high quality audio.
- Music & Sound Effects. Creating custom soundtracks or purchasing rights to music can be costly. If you’re hoping to save money, ask your studio about your stock music and sound effect options.
Depending on where you are in the production process, you may or may not need some of these services. Of course, the more services requested from the animation studio, the greater the ultimate cost of your video.
3. Video Length & Timeline
The length of your video also will greatly impact the price. Keep in mind that most animation projects are priced by the second. The longer your video, the more expensive it will become. The shorter it is, the less expensive it will be.
In addition to the length of your video, another factor that can impact animation cost is your timeline or expected deadline. The tighter your requested turnaround, the more expensive your video can become—especially if you need the studio to rush the project faster than their typical turnaround time.
4. Revisions
While most studios will have some revisions priced into the project, change requests beyond key stages in your project will likely add to your cost:
- Concepting, Scripting & Audio. Requesting changes after scripting and voice over work has been completed will increase the cost of your video, as voice over talent will need to be brought back to perform the new script.
- Animatics, Styleframes & Characters. Likewise, requesting changes after styleframes and character models have been finalized will increase your cost.
- Production. At this stage, all concepting and styling should be finalized. The animation studio will be actively illustrating your assets. Asset change requests at this stage can increase the cost of your video prior to animation.
The further along you are in the production process when you request changes, the more costly your revisions can be. If possible, ensure you are happy with a script before moving forward with voiceover. The same goes for character concepts and styleframes. Once production begins, it will be more costly for you to make changes.
Examples from Creative Humans
To help you visualize animation cost in various price ranges, here are some examples from vetted studios within the Creative Humans network:
Jamba Juice "A Universe of Possibilities" Advertisement (36s)
$185,000 - $205,000
These are industrial quotes. Of course short films has a bigger front end in terms of asset creation used over a relatively short time, whereas a longform series will repeatedly use those assets (if CG). Still this does suggest just how expensive Angels of Death and even Hammer and Bolter are. These do not come cheap!
Another useful point of comparison, from a fan site, perhaps less accurate
How Much It Cost To Make A Cartoon Show
So we are going to talk about the cost of series episodes versus animated movies like the ones Disney used to make.
The number I am going to give you here apply to all companies such as Disney, Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network and other animation studios.
To create a cartoon show you need a script, character design (concept art), a storyboard, animation and finally the voice actors. So the budget applies to all these things necessary to make the show come to life. The average cost for a cartoon show like Steven Universe, American Dragon, Cat Dog, Cow and Chicken, Hey Arnold , The Fairy Odd Parents, its $300,000 to $600,000 per episode.
The smaller the budget, the smaller the team that works on it and of course, the bigger the budget the bigger the team. So lets say, for the production of Hey Arnold, if the show is given $400,000 per episode then that budget is spread through the production team. Now of course with a budget of $400K the team is going to be much smaller. So regularly you will have a lead animator and then you will have 3 other animators working on the show. The average salary for animators is $60,000. So with three people that is $180,000 pent. Now the voice actors are paid handsomely (surprise). Most voice actors make $80,000 to $100,000 per year. A voice actor easily makes $10,000 per episode of a cartoon. Lets also not forget the sound effect editor, the story board artist and the people who color everything.
As you can see, that money goes down quickly and this is only with a small team. Now lets look at how much it cost for a bigger project or popular show.
One of my favorite American Cartoons is Avatar The Last Airbender by Nickelodeon (it should really be categorized as an anime). A popular show like Avatar the last Airbender could easily cost $2 million per episode. So a 14 episode season would equal to $28 million spent on the show. That is a lot of money. This should would need a team of 7 animators working on it.
How long does it take to make a cartoon or animated show?
So the average animator takes about 8 hours (of their shift) to make a 60 second animation of a cartoon show. 60 seconds equals 1 minute. Therefore if an animator works the average 40 hours per week he can make 5 minutes of a cartoon per week. So it takes about a whole month to make an episode. The more complex the animation the longer it takes.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
that's a horriable idea, GW right now will happily send you the instructions for free as a PDF if you send them an email. charging for it? uuugh
DaveC wrote: The live (free) preview shows got in excess of 40,000 viewers as a live show. the dominion preview has 538k+ views and the 40K codex preview 590k since the initial broadcast (probably a lot of repeat views on both). The YouTube channel has 492k subs (again free) with the highest viewed video at 3.9 million views (40K 9th Ed cinematic trailer). Hard to tell how all that translates into paid subs though. There are plenty of GW Twitch streams with less than 1,000 views.
Hard to say really because the paying wall does make a difference here.
Live casual free twitch streams are for the most part empty.
You tube the repeat numbers dont give an accurate perspective of time and numbers etc.
Personally I think GW will have good numbers on Warhammer+ though, specially on first months but its going to depend if the updates are worth it and the if subs stay for more than 1 month or are replaced with new subs.
The fact the content is low atm because they are starting does not help here, but give it a year to see where it goes.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
that's a horriable idea, GW right now will happily send you the instructions for free as a PDF if you send them an email. charging for it? uuugh
Did he say it would replace current system? No. Stop puttrng words on his mouth.
You would get benefit of having instruction RIGHT NOW as subscriber rather than wait for day(s). Not that bad if you were planning something and realize you need instructions. Could save close to a week depending on time you realize you need it(friday eveking...) and how busy gw is. I have waited 3 days before for instructions.
For gw would also reduce burden for customer service while not really losing anything, of course better would be available say on product page but little perk for subscribers in addition to current isn't horrible.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
that's a horriable idea, GW right now will happily send you the instructions for free as a PDF if you send them an email. charging for it? uuugh
Did he say it would replace current system? No. Stop puttrng words on his mouth.
You would get benefit of having instruction RIGHT NOW as subscriber rather than wait for day(s). Not that bad if you were planning something and realize you need instructions. Could save close to a week depending on time you realize you need it(friday eveking...) and how busy gw is. I have waited 3 days before for instructions.
For gw would also reduce burden for customer service while not really losing anything, of course better would be available say on product page but little perk for subscribers in addition to current isn't horrible.
nah I'm just savvy eneugh to know that in a situation like that a company is gonna stop giving the goods away for free
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
that's a horriable idea, GW right now will happily send you the instructions for free as a PDF if you send them an email. charging for it? uuugh
Did he say it would replace current system? No. Stop puttrng words on his mouth.
You would get benefit of having instruction RIGHT NOW as subscriber rather than wait for day(s). Not that bad if you were planning something and realize you need instructions. Could save close to a week depending on time you realize you need it(friday eveking...) and how busy gw is. I have waited 3 days before for instructions.
For gw would also reduce burden for customer service while not really losing anything, of course better would be available say on product page but little perk for subscribers in addition to current isn't horrible.
nah I'm just savvy eneugh to know that in a situation like that a company is gonna stop giving the goods away for free
Criticising GW for something you’ve totally invented them possibly doing in the future. Dakka at its finest.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
that's a horriable idea, GW right now will happily send you the instructions for free as a PDF if you send them an email. charging for it? uuugh
Did he say it would replace current system? No. Stop puttrng words on his mouth.
You would get benefit of having instruction RIGHT NOW as subscriber rather than wait for day(s). Not that bad if you were planning something and realize you need instructions. Could save close to a week depending on time you realize you need it(friday eveking...) and how busy gw is. I have waited 3 days before for instructions.
For gw would also reduce burden for customer service while not really losing anything, of course better would be available say on product page but little perk for subscribers in addition to current isn't horrible.
nah I'm just savvy eneugh to know that in a situation like that a company is gonna stop giving the goods away for free
Criticising GW for something you’ve totally invented them possibly doing in the future. Dakka at its finest.
nah more like noting that having two options one locked behind a paywall the other free creates a sitruation where is is desirable to make the free option as bad as possiable if not the outright removal of it. I get the idea just I think it'd create a preverse incentive for GW to make their customer support or lesser quality
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
Why not take the instructions out of the boxes completely and just let you download the pdfs from WHPlus?
Holy hell, nothing like taking what should've been free to begin with and asking the company to hide it behind a paywall.
The "free" episode of Hammer and Bolter was not very good. Episodes 1 and 2, however; are really good. I assume they used the Ork episode as the free-view because of all the new Ork stuff we are seeing.
I have fairly high hopes for WH+ and am not bummed that I am subscribed for the year...yet.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
Why not take the instructions out of the boxes completely and just let you download the pdfs from WHPlus?
Holy hell, nothing like taking what should've been free to begin with and asking the company to hide it behind a paywall.
I think what endlesswaltz123 was talking about was something like the old annual, where GW would give a full parts breakdown of each kit and hence "make conversions easier". The old annuals were great for that, I'd spend hours just flicking through looking for different bits to use in conversions.
It's not like you really need instruction manuals to make 99% of GW's models anyway, a few of the vehicles which have internal components maybe, but usually it's pretty easy to see what goes where.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
Why not take the instructions out of the boxes completely and just let you download the pdfs from WHPlus?
Holy hell, nothing like taking what should've been free to begin with and asking the company to hide it behind a paywall.
Why not take something somebody said, pretend they said something totally different and then whine about the thing they didn’t actually say?
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
Why not take the instructions out of the boxes completely and just let you download the pdfs from WHPlus?
Holy hell, nothing like taking what should've been free to begin with and asking the company to hide it behind a paywall.
Why not take something somebody said, pretend they said something totally different and then whine about the thing they didn’t actually say?
People will be selling the Vindicare and Orruk boss on eBay for close £60. Not only will this be unsurprising, I'd be surprised if it didn't happen, so it's essentially free for anyone that can be bothered to resell the mini.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: Just had an idea of some easy win content for Warhammer+ for GW. Have all the model kit instructions in PDF, being able to look at some model kit instructions would make conversions easier, as well as obviously lost instructions and also stop the hassle of trawling the internet for them. It would also allow GW to make some money from the 2nd hand market.
It won't be mega popular, but it adds value, which is where they will struggle to justify for a while if their content is slow to build up.
Why not take the instructions out of the boxes completely and just let you download the pdfs from WHPlus?
Holy hell, nothing like taking what should've been free to begin with and asking the company to hide it behind a paywall.
Why not take something somebody said, pretend they said something totally different and then whine about the thing they didn’t actually say?
They said they want GW to put pdf manuals behind a paywall. Unsurprisingly, I think a) gw not providing instructions in pdf on their product pages is already a trash move, b) putting anything behind a paywall is a trash move, but putting something like instructions behind a paywall is scummy. It adds zero new value.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people, on their own, willingly, come up with such anti-consumer ideas to "propose" to GW.
physical codex to access most rules).
