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.

I'm not interested in pictures, in advertising, or in battle reports.

I want my game to have its questions answered officially. And if they won't do this for free, I will be willing to pay for it.

I don't know if any of you are too, but I would definitely subscribe to a monthly GW magazine which, hopefully along with the other features we grew accustomed to over the years (sans the poor marketing) we can see a magazine with a purpose as a way to ensure we get our updates and GW get their ''due'' for their poorly written rules.

So my query is, would you, a player, pay for rules updates rather than paying for advertising? Would you do it in addition to advertising?

When I buy software, I expect patches and updates to be free.

Exactly.

While I accept that the complexity of your average wargame means some errata and FAQ are inevitable, it is no way any fault of the consumer.

I wouldn't expect to pay for anything needed to make anything else I purchased work properly, why the hell should I line Gw's pockets just to be able to use theirs?

I would rather some form of proof reading and editing of publications that means minimal errata after publication.

I used to pay for the good type of advertising, from the "The Man Your Man Could Smell Like" school of advertising - advertisements that people seek out for their own sake because they are enjoyable in their own right.

Short stories advertise your product. Cool art advertises your product. Sensible tactica advertises your product. Good battle reports advertise your product. Index Astartes advertised your product.

Avian wrote:
When I buy software, I expect patches and updates to be free.

I am right there with you. IMO, a monthly magazine should add to my experience with the game. Whether that be really cool battle reports, new painting articles to improve my skills/show me how they achieve their schemes, and general discussion about the hobby.

New editions of games have been happening since WRG Ancients 2nd edition in 1969 if not before.

They usually fix errata in the previous edition and provide clarifications and updates.

The main differences with GW rules are that the quality of the initial release is poor, the new editions are very expensive, and they don't fix problems rather than introduce different ones.

Kilkrazy wrote:New editions of games have been happening since WRG Ancients 2nd edition in 1969 if not before.

They usually fix errata in the previous edition and provide clarifications and updates.

The main differences with GW rules are that the quality of the initial release is poor, the new editions are very expensive, and they don't fix problems rather than introduce different ones.

I do like the way GW keeps their hobby moving, I must be honest. I don't always like what they do to certain units (Read: Bloodcrushers) but the constantly changing face of 40k means that the armies never stay the same and never get jaded.

I guess I'm willing to pay for that.

Havok210 wrote:

Avian wrote:
When I buy software, I expect patches and updates to be free.

I am right there with you. IMO, a monthly magazine should add to my experience with the game. Whether that be really cool battle reports, new painting articles to improve my skills/show me how they achieve their schemes, and general discussion about the hobby.

I'm in the same school, honestly. My problem is that GW doesn't do the patches and updates whatsoever - 40k desperately needs some of these patches (they haven't even fething fixed the sunshark bomber yet. Tau have been out for a year), I'm willing to cave and pay for them to actually produce these much needed updates.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
the constantly changing face of 40k means that the armies never stay the same and never get jaded.

It also means that the game never improves. Good game design for new editions involves having a solid idea of what you want your game to be and then converging on it over time as you spot new ways to improve on your design or fix your past mistakes. GW, on the other hand, has no such guiding plan. They just throw random stuff into the new edition every time they have an idea, without any overall concept of how the new edition is supposed to be better than the previous one. So the end result is a bloated mess of garbage rules, with different garbage every few years for the sake of being different (and getting you to pay another $150 for your rulebook + codex). Problems are never fixed because you never get the kind of stable development that can actually improve a game instead of just hoping to distract the customers with shiny new stuff.

GW's business strategy is not to perfect their products, or to develop new products, it is to constantly flex their current products in order to make people buy new editions and models.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW's business strategy is not to perfect their products, or to develop new products, it is to constantly flex their current products in order to make people buy new editions and models.

Exactly. They never learned how to *improve* their products, only how to change them so that the old problems weren't. The need for so many FAQs would never be as great if they would just learn how to write *clear and concise* rules or how to test them to a standard other than "That sounds/looks cool!".

Skriker

I don't want FAQs in my magazines. I don't want to get blindsided by a change to my army because I missed the November issue or whatever.

I think that I would rather see an old direction for GW monthly magazines - bring back the Fat Dwarfs!

Put in rules, units, characters, scenarios, bits of cardboard terrain and/or floor plans.

Channel the Fat Bloke!

The Auld Grump, start by eating a couple of bacon butties....

Well, I cancelled my subscriptions shortly after the first edition of warhammer visions came out, finally got round to reading it today.

All I can say is, despite having been a subscriber to WD since I was 16, and I am actually glad I did. I read it cover to-cover in 10 minutes (and thats including the time I had to stop reading to show the train conductor my ticket). I've got better things to spend my subscription money on than a photo album of the studio models in various poses (excluding the 8 pages reserved for non-studio models), and in terms of actual readable content it would probably fill a single A4 sheet, if you took out the fact that it is printed in 3 languages...

 Leigen_Zero wrote:
Well, I cancelled my subscriptions shortly after the first edition of warhammer visions came out, finally got round to reading it today.

All I can say is, despite having been a subscriber to WD since I was 16, and I am actually glad I did. I read it cover to-cover in 10 minutes (and thats including the time I had to stop reading to show the train conductor my ticket). I've got better things to spend my subscription money on than a photo album of the studio models in various poses (excluding the 8 pages reserved for non-studio models), and in terms of actual readable content it would probably fill a single A4 sheet, if you took out the fact that it is printed in 3 languages...

I had the same impression when I looked into it. This picture book is not really a must-have. Collectors or painters/artists might object. The weekly magazine looks like a comic and is more for the player.