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.

Posted By Saber on 12/21/2006 8:47 AM
I don't get it. Why do so many people get so angry at Games Workshop for writing rules that are imperfect?

Most of them don't. The majority of people are quite happy to accept that mistakes happen.

What people get angry about is the almost complete lack of interest GW show towards fixing their mistakes. Where other companies take feedback through their forums, put out FAQs as quickly as they can get them written, and use each successive edition of their games to tighten up their rules, GW just keep on coasting along telling us to figure it out for ourselves.

Maybe they think we are adult enough to figure it out ourselves?

Right. A games company that is oriented towards 12 year olds yet also puts an international tourney system thinks we're "adult" enough to fix their glaring rules mistakes...

The funny thing is games definitely aimed at adults, like Flames of War, Command Decision, Warmachine and countless others, all provide some sort of rules support, be it faqs and errata that aren't flippant or condescending, online forums where everyman joe can interact and conversate with the game designers & figure sculptors, and/or some other interactive level of customer support for their rules product. GW does none of this.

Simplistic system marketed towards kids
Rules as written targetted towards casual players
Events run for hardcore gamers
Price affordable to those with full time employment

Fantastic business model if I've ever seen one myself...  Kids may be confused by the loosely written rules, and can't afford the product themselves...  Hardcore gamers are unhappy with the high price tag to maintain performance in the shifting seas of codex creep and the ambigious ruleset... 

GW should just pick their market and stay in it instead of trying to be everything to everyone and failing miserably.

Posted By beef on 12/21/2006 1:15 PM
Maybe they think we are adult enough to figure it out ourselves?

Ah. Ok.

So if you buy a TV, and it's missing the volume control, you would be ok with the TV manufacturer telling you to just 'fix it yourself'?

I think not.

Likewise, if a company sells an $80 rulebook, and it's missing entire sections of rules, it hardly seems unreasonable to expect them to fix the problem.

Nor does it seem unreasonable to think that releasing a $30 supplement 18 months later with some of those missing rules, and an incomplete FAQ six months after that is not exactly an acceptable response to the problem.

But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Umm, I think beef was being sarcastic...

When you can make out the words that he's typing, he sounds like a pretty smart guy -- give him some credit!

It seems to me that the ambiguity in the rules is good for business, and here's why: Added ambiguity makes for added conversation (like this our most enjoyable specimen here) which makes for added exposure which makes for all those nifty ideas of the next great army project. Now, in the long run this will of course cost players (and thus: money) but I can definitely see advantages in this for GW. A workmate of mine got me back into 40k eight months back, and since then I've spent more money on the product than in the three or so years before that. Having a lot of time to kill while at work and a few splendid forums are to blame for my continued exposure/addiction. Having rules to explore and debate about are thus an added bonus for every active gamer! Now, why would GW want to lose all these advantages for no gain?

... And no, im being not completely serious

It is fun arguing about the rules.

However, the ambiguity isn't there as a policy, it's there because GW are incompetent at writing and editing copy.

Posted By logan007 on 12/21/2006 5:14 PM
Umm, I think beef was being sarcastic...

When you can make out the words that he's typing, he sounds like a pretty smart guy -- give him some credit!

What if I can't ever make out the words that he's typing?

I've really enjoyed this thread; it's been kind of interesting.

I think one quote I have to take umbridge with is that we set an "impossibly high" level of expectation if we expect "perfect" rules.

Avalon hill produced exquisitely tight rules sets for decades before video games and miniature games drove the board game company to sell out.

GW just needs to get it through their head that fluff and rules should never be side by side, and paragraph format rules sets for wargames really aren't that efficient in explaining rules. That format is easier to read for the eye, but harder to nail down the rule you're looking for.

Most of AH's rule sets were in outline format. I've played AH games for 20+ years and never had a rules argument, even with ASL.

So, no, it isn't an "impossibly high" standard to expect tight rules. All it would take is for GW to hire a couple of technical writers (the kind that write instruction manuals for VCR's) to translate the rules as expressed by the designers into a written format. They would catch the inconsistencies as they were written in. (BTW, I have a degree in English and studied technical writing briefly, so GW, if you're reading this, call me!

On  a second note, one post mentioned that the game developers don't have the time we do to come up with rules loop holes, etc.  Um....developers get paid to do nothing but design rules 8 hours a day, five days a week.  I sure don't have that much time to devote to examining the rules.  The Dev team should be the absolute experts on all aspects of every codex and rule set GW has printed.  I mean, on Monday, they could do nothing but read all the codexices before spending Tue through Fri working on the next project, keeping what they read on Monday in mind.  Then, the next week, they could repeat.   I mean, seriously, the JOB of the Dev team is to write the rules; it just seems apparent to me that they don't have any pride in their product.

Sal.

Another issue that has not been brought up has been the continuality of the franchize.

There has to have had to have been about eight to ten different people working on the issues of development of the races and factions of just 40K itself. There has been no conversation of how the developers hand off thier work to the next one who takes over the project of the race.

Nevermind that the same sort of issue is as well happening with the rules, and the development of the general gaming direction of 40K. I know that the developer has carte blanch with the project, because it shows in the evolution of each one of the races. Space marines seem like a training ground, then they evolve on to other more hearty projects.

I feel that they know exactly what they are doing, but the poor things get overwhelmed by thier task, and don't really know that thier decisions have such of a dire effect on the game in general. Every once in awhile you can see the issue come up with the whole game and generally whenever there is a personnel turnaround.

If you really want to know how it works behind the scenes, go ask Andy Chambers what he thinks about it. Im sure Mike Mcvey could give you an earful as well.
Incompetent is a word that you can throw at them, but come on...
The buisiness end of this company is a publicly traded entity. bottom line is the name of the game on that level. They don't give rat drop about rules, quality, etc. Bucks powers that train, and as long as theire are 10-15 year olds with kings coin of the realm, theres going to be a GW to be paid.

There issue with upper management isn't something to go into with FAQ's, but it is a symptom of the curse.

The FAQ's come out as a band-aid. They suck so bad because they are written up as a temporary fix, and are not thought out and written with alot or research or followup.

Posted By Grot 6 on 12/22/2006 11:26 AM

The FAQ's come out as a band-aid. They suck so bad because they are written up as a temporary fix, and are not thought out and written with alot or research or followup.

Then why do the original rules suck so badly?

They both suck for the same reason: incompetence at the managerial level.

I'm not sure. They do a lot of promotion work too. I have no idea what the actual ratio of time spent is though.

That's an unfair question. We all know that the rules suck so that we buy more minis.

If its too annoying to be workable, quit. If not, play the game. It really is just a game.

Posted By jfrazell on 12/23/2006 11:15 AM
If its too annoying to be workable, quit. If not, play the game. It really is just a game.

It doesn't matter what it is. It's a product like any other. Consumers have every right to complain about a faulty product.

Quitting is an option, sure. But returning to my TV analogy from before, if your new TV doesn't work the way it should, are you seriously just going to toss it into a cupboard and say 'Really, it's just a TV...'? Or are you going to complain a little?

40K, as it stands, is playable. It can even still be fun, if you're playing with the right people.

That doesn't make it any less a faulty product. Nor does it make it any less aggravating that GW seem completely uninterested in fixing that faulty product.

People can be annoyed at the shoddy rules, and at GW's failure to address their mistakes, without necessarily feeling the need to stop playing.

Posted By insaniak on 12/23/2006 2:31 PM

It doesn't matter what it is. It's a product like any other. Consumers have every right to complain about a faulty product.

Quitting is an option, sure. But returning to my TV analogy from before, if your new TV doesn't work the way it should, are you seriously just going to toss it into a cupboard and say 'Really, it's just a TV...'? Or are you going to complain a little?

40K, as it stands, is playable. It can even still be fun, if you're playing with the right people.

That doesn't make it any less a faulty product. Nor does it make it any less aggravating that GW seem completely uninterested in fixing that faulty product.

People can be annoyed at the shoddy rules, and at GW's failure to address their mistakes, without necessarily feeling the need to stop playing.

This is one of your best analogies Insaniak. Even with the TV, all one is out is the money they spent on the thing. With GW's craptacular product, you're also robbed of the many hours spent building, converting and painting the figures, aquiring suitable terrain (including making the entire set up yourself if there are no suitable LFGS around), and all of the other hobby things one has to do.

And this doesn't even approach when they decide to make whole ranges of figures obsolete just to get people to buy the latest. That'd be like one day going to turn your tv on only to get a message that it is now obsolete, and to watch TV again you'll need to get another TV.

But Nyar, it's perfectly reasonable! I can no longer (practically) use my grandparents' 1950s TV for today's hit TV shows. Damn those vile Sony salesmen who tell me I have to "upgrade" to something new. Also, who needs cable TV anyway? My TV works fine with the local channels. I don't need it to work with some foreign networks to get my fix. Them's networks are evil, I tell you. Those lieberals and their evil national news shows. I don't need none of that. (SA is down but if it weren't that new emoticon with its arms crossed goes here.)

I stand by  my statement. GW pays scant attention to FAQs. They do not view FAQ's as part of their product. Thats a fact.  Griping about it is not going to change it. 

Its like WD.  WD is has taken craptacular to a whole new level recently.  I would get very annoyed about that, about spending money for nothing but a catalog, which I should be getting for free, because all discernible non-marketing content has been removed.  But once I didn't renew my subscription I was remarkably ok about the whole thing. They can do what they want, but I don't have to support it.  I've even gone back to playing an occasional 40K recently.

Its the same for the FAQs. If the FAQ's are such a factor of annoyance that they make the game un-enjoyable, then sell your stuff and move on. Life is too short to be annoyed by this (CENSORED).  If its just a minor blurb  then ok, just vent on occasion buut play the game until something better coems along for you.

 

The thing is, if GW is a figure company that only does rules to encourage sales of its figures, why do the rules cost £42? (A player needs at least the BGB plus a codex.)

Infinity The Game gives its rules and lists away.

Because they are a company first and foremost and will attempt to turn as high a profit as possible just like any other business, just like every individual tries to get a high paying job as possible.

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/25/2006 11:52 AM
Because they are a compant first and foremost and will attempt to turn as high a profit as possible just like any other business, just like every individual tries to get a high paying job as possible.

Well, they actually don't.  On an individual level, people frequently take lower-paying jobs and work in less lucrative careers because their give other factors higher priority.

A publically-traded company, on the other hand, is legally beholden to its shareholders to maximize profits, and its officers can actually be sued by the shareholders for failing to do so.

I'd say you have about as much right to say there aren't people who try to have well-paying careers as I do to say that there are. However it looks like you agree with me that it is acceptable and expected for GW to charge as much as they can get away with for their product.

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/25/2006 10:57 PM
I'd say you have about as much right to say there aren't people who try to have well-paying careers as I do to say that there are.

But that's not what either of you said.

You didn't say that 'there are people who try to have well paying jobs'... you said that every person will try to get the highest paying job possible.

Which, as Mannahnin said, is simply not true. Many people choose jobs based on other factors than how much it pays.

Leave it to the RAW nuts to take things as literally as possible. People ideally get jobs they like, but considering that that is much more rare than I wish it was, people usually go for the most money they can get. Honestly I've never heard anyone say they wanted to be a poor bum.

But whatever guys, GW is evil and the average Joe is a saint right?

Forgive me if I come across as angry, it's just really tiring to see people constantly give a company a hard time for being a company. It makes me wonder if people on auto forums complain about auto prices and things like that to the same degree.

Just be glad you have a disposable income to begin with. We are all so fortunate to be in wealthy countries with oportunities to live very comfortable lives, and it seems ridiculous to me to get upset over the cost of an optional and indulgent purchase.

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/26/2006 12:19 AM

Forgive me if I come across as angry, it's just really tiring to see people constantly give a company a hard time for being a company. It makes me wonder if people on auto forums complain about auto prices and things like that to the same degree.

Actually, yes. That's why we have car reviews, Consumer Reports reviews, and the like. People complain about products they see as being priced outside their value (i.e. their quality vis-a-vis their cost), and eventually buy that which they see as being of value (this goes both ways; people will go to the discount big-box stores for some things and the boutiques for others, all based on value).

I am glad that I have a disposable income and am more thankful for the roof over my head and the food in my belly and the ability to do something meaningful with my time. Having said that, if I'm going to spend my hard-earned dollar, it better be of appropriate value, both in terms of cost and quality.

GW is evil incarnate. I cannot count the number of times I have glued my fingers together
assembling their models (mostly because my fingers were glued together)...

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/26/2006 12:19 AM

Leave it to the RAW nuts to take things as literally as possible.

Well excuse me for assuming that what you said was what you meant.

For the record, I can't recall ever claiming that GW is evil. I've also never complained about their prices. In fact, not so very long ago, I was working in a games store and generally defending their business practices. I don't much like their half-assed rules writing, but have no problems whatsoever with the way they do business in general.

I do, however, tend to assume that what someone says is what they mean. That's how communication works. If you say one thing, and then claim that you said something else entirely, it really shouldn't be any surprise that people call you on it.

Insaniak: Every time you say every you mean 100%? Or do you understand that often times people use every in a general sense to mean a majority? I think you do, but keep going along here, I'm certain we'll both grow as people because of this petty bickering. Also, I don't see the need to be condescending. It doesn't help your point. What we have is a miscommunication, they happen all the time, even more so over the internet where facial expression, body language, tone, and inflection are lost. I find it's best to try to read and reread someones posts a few times just to make sure of an understanding before outright refuting someone. That or ask a question for clarification.

Also, when I speak of two things in the same post, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are intertwined, nor does it mean that they are directed at the same individual, if they are even directed at anyone in particular at all.

To re-rail this thread: The contradiction on GW's part is unprofessional and amature, and considering that they have so much experience I expect better of them. I wont condemn them over one aspect of the FAQ though. Game design isn't as easy as people think it is, primarily because when you write and test rules, you cannot even begine to fathom how 200,000 players will interperet and abuse them. The fact that they even issue FAQs is enough to say that they are trying, but it seems that gamers in particular, and this extends from board games to video games, are harder to please than anyone else on the planet. I'm glad I'm not in GWs shoes, because I'd get sick of hearing how much everything sucks.

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/26/2006 2:11 PM
Insaniak: Every time you say every you mean 100%?

Pardon?

When I write a post, I type what I mean, yes. If what I've written isn't actually what I meant, then the post is just a waste of time.

Posted By Wayfarer on 12/26/2006 2:11 PM
Or do you understand that often times people use every in a general sense to mean a majority? I think you do, but keep going along here, I'm certain we'll both grow as people because of this petty bickering. Also, I don't see the need to be condescending. It doesn't help your point. What we have is a miscommunication, they happen all the time,

I wasn't being condescending, I merely pointed out that you were being inconsistent, and then responded to your cranky-sounding post about 'RAW nuts'

You're the one who typed something that they apparently didn't actually mean, and then responded with abuse when corrected.

And frankly, yes, if someone says 'every person' I take that to mean 'every person'

If you mean 'some people' then you should say 'some people'.

Otherwise, 'miscommunications' happen, and people start calling other people names.