Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Alpharius wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If Dakkanaughts restricted themselves to speaking about only subjects they understand, then Dakka would be as quiet as a graveyard.

Dunno. I could bore you all to tears with the finer points of Investigation and Adjudication!

Don't sell yourself short - you bore us to tears on a lot of subjects!

GW's GAMA reveals were...OK.

Here's hoping that they were saving the Good Stuff for Adepticon!

That's kind of how it went last year right?

Though I think Warcry is pretty darn cool.

 Sasori wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If Dakkanaughts restricted themselves to speaking about only subjects they understand, then Dakka would be as quiet as a graveyard.

Dunno. I could bore you all to tears with the finer points of Investigation and Adjudication!

Don't sell yourself short - you bore us to tears on a lot of subjects!

GW's GAMA reveals were...OK.

Here's hoping that they were saving the Good Stuff for Adepticon!

That's kind of how it went last year right?

Though I think Warcry is pretty darn cool.

It seems to be Chaos-themed fantasy version of Necromunda with simpler rules. I am not really that inspired by it personally. What draws you it?

Well, for me, that it IS chaos themed fantasy warbands, with nice models. And a focus on mortals rather than chaos warriors or daemon-princes-to-be

Can't comment on the rules, since I've seen nothing on them.


The worrying part is that it will be handled like the new Necromunda.

Voss wrote:
Well, for me, that it IS chaos themed fantasy warbands, with nice models. And a focus on mortals rather than chaos warriors or daemon-princes-to-be

Can't comment on the rules, since I've seen nothing on them.


The worrying part is that it will be handled like the new Necromunda.

Different teams of people. It’s by the Shadespire/Kill Team guys, not the specialist games studio.

Chaos warbands fighting for the attention of the gods has always been a cool feature of Warhammer and I’m glad to see it being explored further.

I’m hoping beyond hope for a massive boon table with some funky mutations and powers on it.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Chaos warbands fighting for the attention of the gods has always been a cool feature of Warhammer and I’m glad to see it being explored further.

I’m hoping beyond hope for a massive boon table with some funky mutations and powers on it.

That would pique my interest.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Chaos warbands fighting for the attention of the gods has always been a cool feature of Warhammer and I’m glad to see it being explored further.

I’m hoping beyond hope for a massive boon table with some funky mutations and powers on it.

yeah I'd love to see them do a kill team expansion based around the concept too

 ImAGeek wrote:

Voss wrote:
Well, for me, that it IS chaos themed fantasy warbands, with nice models. And a focus on mortals rather than chaos warriors or daemon-princes-to-be

Can't comment on the rules, since I've seen nothing on them.


The worrying part is that it will be handled like the new Necromunda.

Different teams of people. It’s by the Shadespire/Kill Team guys, not the specialist games studio.

Eh. Different design teams are fine and all... But I suspect the marketing team matters more on the handling, and I doubt that will be a different one. They certainly haven't done Kill Team any favors with the splendiferous concept of 'Kill Team: Elites' or the non-existence of a boxed starter for... 6 months now.

Chikout wrote:
One little tidbit is that Mark Gibbons recently announced that he would do some art for GW again.

I saw that on his facebook page. Good news. Best artist that's ever worked for GW IMO.

I have always been a big fan of MG’s work. Glad to hear he’s coming back. Looking forward to seeing what he produces.

Mark Gibbons is coming back? Cool - I remember doing an art project on his work back in high school

The GAMA previews were... underwhelming at best, with the Halfling team an unexpected high point. I was streaming on Twitch when the BSF preview slot came up, and was kinda confused by how little was in that update - thought we'd be getting at least two things in each slot.

Oh, well, I know better for next year!

Yeah, some of these older GW artists need to NOT be back. GW is big enough it can actually afford to chase talent, and going back to the amateurs that it was forced to use early on is a really BAD sign for me. It either means GW needs to cut costs somewhere, or that they are trying to smack the 2nd Ed 40K nostalgia button as hard as possible.

Are you trying to imply that Mark Gibbons, who appears to have done fundamental work for GW, Blizzard and 2000AD is an amateur?

 Red_Five wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If Dakkanaughts restricted themselves to speaking about only subjects they understand, then Dakka would be as quiet as a graveyard.

Dunno. I could bore you all to tears with the finer points of Investigation and Adjudication!

Don't sell yourself short - you bore us to tears on a lot of subjects!

GW's GAMA reveals were...OK.

Here's hoping that they were saving the Good Stuff for Adepticon!

That's kind of how it went last year right?

Though I think Warcry is pretty darn cool.

It seems to be Chaos-themed fantasy version of Necromunda with simpler rules. I am not really that inspired by it personally. What draws you it?

I've never played Necromunda, but I like small tighter-balanced games that can be played quickly, with most things included. I don't always have time for a 3 hour AOS or 40k game. This helps get my fix, without taking up a huge portion of the day.

Necromunda is neither balanced nor quicker tbh, hahah.

 Flinty wrote:
Are you trying to imply that Mark Gibbons, who appears to have done fundamental work for GW, Blizzard and 2000AD is an amateur?

That's what I heard.

Mark Gibbons work in the 90s for Warhammer was absolutely spectacular. I’ll admit to be a bigger fan personally of the early 2000s, B&W work by Dainton, Boyd, and Kopinski, but Gibbons’ work is both iconic and memorable.

I’m thrilled to here that he will be providing some artwork for the universe again.

 Just Tony wrote:
Yeah, some of these older GW artists need to NOT be back. GW is big enough it can actually afford to chase talent, and going back to the amateurs that it was forced to use early on is a really BAD sign for me. It either means GW needs to cut costs somewhere, or that they are trying to smack the 2nd Ed 40K nostalgia button as hard as possible.

It really pays to look up an artist before you spout this kind of stuff, because you're so off base on Mark's work it's genuinely hilarious.

I mean, eww, what a hack right?

Eh. Scrolling through his facebook page, I recognize some classic pieces, but a lot of the proportions on people are... wonky. Sometimes it looks intentional, in a sort of comic booky style, in others... it produces some of the scrawniest space marines I've ever seen

Mark was my favorite GW artist back in the day, and still one of the best imho. But to each their own. I usually dislike Blanche’s art, but it’s undeniably a cornerstone of GW’s design.

Flinty wrote:Are you trying to imply that Mark Gibbons, who appears to have done fundamental work for GW, Blizzard and 2000AD is an amateur?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
Are you trying to imply that Mark Gibbons, who appears to have done fundamental work for GW, Blizzard and 2000AD is an amateur?

That's what I heard.

And when he WAS doing the fundamental work for GW, was he a well established artist, or were they pinching cheap work wherever they could? Blanche sort of answers that question.

Yodhrin wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Yeah, some of these older GW artists need to NOT be back. GW is big enough it can actually afford to chase talent, and going back to the amateurs that it was forced to use early on is a really BAD sign for me. It either means GW needs to cut costs somewhere, or that they are trying to smack the 2nd Ed 40K nostalgia button as hard as possible.

It really pays to look up an artist before you spout this kind of stuff, because you're so off base on Mark's work it's genuinely hilarious.

I mean, eww, what a hack right?

I stand by my statement. Look again at the proportions of the artwork and the evisceration of anatomy in the poses, as well as some common perspective trappings. Honestly now that I know he worked for Blizzard, it explains the almost comical disproportion on their characters for WOW and such.

Voss wrote:Eh. Scrolling through his facebook page, I recognize some classic pieces, but a lot of the proportions on people are... wonky. Sometimes it looks intentional, in a sort of comic booky style, in others... it produces some of the scrawniest space marines I've ever seen

And it looks like I'm not the only one who noticed.


I realizing what I say is polarizing, and I realize that for some odd reason the fandom as a whole tend to worship all of the output of that early GW time period like it's beyond reproach, but the matter still stands that they also have better artists to pool from now, AND that they can afford to be choosy.


Weird thing I also noticed is you never see him do anything but pin up shots, I don't think I've seen a single mass battle shot from him.

These things are obviously subjective, but Gibbons is far from an amateur, even back when he was originally working for GW.

Personal taste is personal taste, and I can't really argue with that, but as an amateur artist myself, I do find the things that have been highlighted here as "criticism" of Gibbons to be amusing. It's also ignoring the huge conceptual contribution that (amateur lol) artists like Gibbons brought to GW. Obviously, this argument almost always boils down to Blanche and the subjective topic of his talent, which is the dumbest argument I've had the displeasure to witness on gaming forums across the spectrum since, without Blanche, you wouldn't have a hobby to argue over.

 Just Tony wrote:

I realizing what I say is polarizing,

So you're aware of how you're acting, but feel the need to do it anyway. Well, I'm certainly thankful you're here to tell us our taste is bad and wrong, truly you are the saviour of the age.

and I realize that for some odd reason the fandom as a whole tend to worship all of the output of that early GW time period like it's beyond reproach

Or, alternatively, and bear with me because this may come as a serious shock: the fandom as a whole likes that art because their taste differs from yours, and they are capable of appreciating things other than anatomical studies.

but the matter still stands that they also have better artists to pool from now

Hello subjectivity my old frieeeeeend, I've come to talk with you agaaaaaaain...

AND that they can afford to be choosy.

So why do you assume they're not being choosy? Just because they're choosing to do something you disagree with isn't evidence they're somehow desperate and have no other options, it's just evidence that apparently GW join "the fandom as a whole" in disagreeing with you

I don’t share Just Tony’s opinion on Mark Gibbons, I don’t dislike his work, and some pieces I actually love, but trying to pull “ooohhh, so you think you’re better than us, if you don’t like what we do, and if you share your upinion” bs is.. well bs, Yodhrin

ekwatts wrote:These things are obviously subjective, but Gibbons is far from an amateur, even back when he was originally working for GW.

Personal taste is personal taste, and I can't really argue with that, but as an amateur artist myself, I do find the things that have been highlighted here as "criticism" of Gibbons to be amusing. It's also ignoring the huge conceptual contribution that (amateur lol) artists like Gibbons brought to GW. Obviously, this argument almost always boils down to Blanche and the subjective topic of his talent, which is the dumbest argument I've had the displeasure to witness on gaming forums across the spectrum since, without Blanche, you wouldn't have a hobby to argue over.

Speculation at best. There was a team working on GW's stuff when it started out. If memory served, the first picture illustrated for Warhammer, the one of the Chaos Warrior smashing a Skeleton with a mace, the one that got the funding for the miniatures from the get go, wasn't done by Blanche. 40K was even done with a team of artists at first, so saying Blanche's absence would have nullified the entire hobby is pretty bold at best.

And concept artists can be bad artists for the record. If you look at the artist for the comic Prime, Norm Breyfogle, he's a rather good artist, especially from a storytelling perspective. The designs of the Prime character and most of the characters in the book? Brent Blevins. Not even CLOSE to the same caliber as Breyfogle but obviously had a lasting effect on that entire comic universe. Doesn't make him a great artist, just meant he came up with at least one great idea for someone else to run with.

Yodhrin wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

I realizing what I say is polarizing,

So you're aware of how you're acting, but feel the need to do it anyway. Well, I'm certainly thankful you're here to tell us our taste is bad and wrong, truly you are the saviour of the age.

...

What the hell?

Me stating my opinion AS AN OPINION is polarizing, as I said. It does not, however, hold a gun to your personal tastes and demand that you like what I like. Never once did I say that people should have my taste in art. The fact that you even come CLOSE to making that leap in logic is baffling.


Actually, thinking on it, it's not baffling. You are one of those vaunted few that cannot take any criticism of what you like. Period. Any critique at all that paints your favored thing in a poor light is a personal attack and will be treated as such.


The REAL question is why my comp's autocorrect Engrished that part of the sentence so bad.

Yodhrin wrote:

and I realize that for some odd reason the fandom as a whole tend to worship all of the output of that early GW time period like it's beyond reproach

Or, alternatively, and bear with me because this may come as a serious shock: the fandom as a whole likes that art because their taste differs from yours, and they are capable of appreciating things other than anatomical studies.

Oh, I'm aware. The fact that Blanche got work after the... art in the 7th Ed. Vampire Counts book is proof of that. I also remember when Rob Liefeld was held up as one of the greatest comic artist of the 90's. Popularity does not necessarily equal quality or technical ability.

Yodhrin wrote:

but the matter still stands that they also have better artists to pool from now

Hello subjectivity my old frieeeeeend, I've come to talk with you agaaaaaaain...

The irony of you saying this is rich.

Yodhrin wrote:

AND that they can afford to be choosy.

So why do you assume they're not being choosy? Just because they're choosing to do something you disagree with isn't evidence they're somehow desperate and have no other options, it's just evidence that apparently GW join "the fandom as a whole" in disagreeing with you

Reread my original post. I stated it smacked of them either spamming the nostalgia button artwise, or that they were tightening the wallet. If Gibbons costs the same as other artists or more, then I'd say it was nostalgia. It's no different than some people preferring 2nd Ed. metal 40K sculpts. Personal taste, but the sculpting has blown past that. If they started hammering out sets that had that same design spirit, say for Orks since those are the most noticeable, then you would agree. But since this is book art, you don't. Instead, a critique of that is paramount to an ancestry insult.

He called MG an amateur, got called on it, and was thus presented with two choices: Recant, or double down.

Sadly he chose the latter.

Karl Kopinski is my favourite artist that has worked for GW. (I always liked the more realistic artist than the more surreal ones) Actually I dont like most Gibbons clasical pieces but from and objetive point of view he was not a bad artist nor an amateur.
And I cant really see what the problem with these tree images. Im an amateur myself but I dont see nothing gronw in the pose or anatomy of that skaven or those goblins , not the first one done in a more realistic eay, not te second, more cartoonized.

But nonetheless Mark Gibbons is muchbetter artist than many of the ones doing work for GW now. Theres some really good ones, like one that did the art for Wrath and Rapture, Carrion Empire, or artworks of Celestine, Greyfax, etc...

Gibbons is alright, but his art is definitely of it's time. It's an older classic looking style, kind of like Blanche. I think in terms of a more serious and gritty style Kopinski and Adrian Smith was the peak of gws art style. Sadly things are more of a mixed bag nowadays and a bit less consistently good. I liked the chaos demons book that was a few years back that was basically entirely Blanche, I like that consistency across a book. I remember being underwhelmed with the initial art for the adeptus mechanicus/cult mech release. Those books were not very inspiring at all.

 ekwatts wrote:
without Blanche, you wouldn't have a hobby to argue over.

That is the biggest load of tosh that gets repeated far to often, they were plenty of artistists before and after Blanche who had more of an influence. It's just that they got erased from history due to GW not knowing the difference between freelance and employed and some people being more happy to sign there rights away.

This is all about GAMA, not whinging about artists, so final warning to all: stay on topic or I'll lock it for good.