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.

Alright everyone, lemme preface this by saying that I recognize that there are some very valid issues with Games Workshop, which need addressing sooner rather than later.

That said, I've seen quite a few things lately:

1) I've seen people complaining that the faster pace of updated rules is so bad that they cannot possibly keep up:

 WarOne wrote:
I simply cannot keep up with their update schedule and what I want to buy.

2) Alongside people saying that GW should update their rules faster:

morgoth wrote:
It may have made sense back then though, because GW didn't have any possibility to update the rules easily.

I think it's different now, because they could make the rules available for free and update them frequently without any problems arising other than "What version of the rules are you playing ?".

This is just an example - others include asking for more content in White Dwarf, then complaining about being charged to access the content that's exclusive to White Dwarf. People wanted a faster release schedule, and now they want it slower. People wanted GW to drop 0-1 restrictions in codecies, now people want them back.

It seems a bit unfair really.

I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

It sad really, but attempting to appease everyone will just end up making no one happy. I like the current release schedule pace and hope they never go back to releasing a codex every 3 months with almost nothing in between updates. Though I would like if they would every year release at a couple of new models for every army along with things like formations and dataslates. This would help keep things fresh and give players of outdated armies something to look forward to every year.

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

I am surprised people would want the release process to speed up, but not expect a drop in quality. Some things should not be rushed, and people should not be surprised if something fouls up in the system when it is rushed.

Lower prices
Balanced ruleset/codexes
Spread the love to every army/faction
Drop resin

I would be very pleased if these things could be accomplished, but it will be a very chilly day in hell before they do.

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Lower prices
Balanced ruleset/codexes
Spread the love to every army/faction
Drop resin

I would be very pleased if these things could be accomplished, but it will be a very chilly day in hell before they do.

The only one of these things that isn't based in a subjective judgement is the lower prices.

Balanced rules are objectively possible, but what exactly they would consist of is, I think, something the entire human race has not figured out yet throughout the entire history of games development. Many people, therefore, have different ideas of what exactly balance truly means.

Spreading the love is arguable - I would argue GW doesn't have 'love' anymore. 6th seemed to be the era of balanced codecies, until Tau and Eldar came out (and Daemons broke). But I don't think those were intentional 'love-gifts' from GW. I think they were dumb oversights.

I have a friend who loves their resin models (though yes, he and I do fight about it XD).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

I am surprised people would want the release process to speed up, but not expect a drop in quality. Some things should not be rushed, and people should not be surprised if something fouls up in the system when it is rushed.

Well its not the quality as much as what they released. I mean the tempestus codex would have been a White Dwarf article years ago. But instead of finishing off all the main factions like want, they decide to release all this clutter thats not necessary and work on the main faction s properly first. So they did what we wanted, in a really odd and somewhat detrimental fashion.

If that makes sense.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It seems a bit unfair really.

Unfair how? Different people want different things.


The trick for any company is simply to find the path that more people approve of.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

I am surprised people would want the release process to speed up, but not expect a drop in quality. Some things should not be rushed, and people should not be surprised if something fouls up in the system when it is rushed.

Well its not the quality as much as what they released. I mean the tempestus codex would have been a White Dwarf article years ago. But instead of finishing off all the main factions like want, they decide to release all this clutter thats not necessary and work on the main faction s properly first. So they did what we wanted, in a really odd and somewhat detrimental fashion.

If that makes sense.

I guess. But some people wanted those supplements. After losing the 'Grenadiers' doctrine after the 3.5-ed Guard Codex, my buddy has ACHED for a Storm Trooper army. My best friend who I just saw tonight is ecstatic over the Farsight supplement - Crisis Suit troops are his wet dream, the goddamn anime fan (I kid, I kid,).

It's almost as if Human beings have different desires and motivations and operating under the assumption that everyone wants the same thing out of a product, organization or person is stupid.

Your example would be better served if you provided an instance of someone saying they wanted one thing from GW, and then later bemoaning having that thing after GW gave it to them. Providing two separate instances of two different people wanting two different things is pointless.

 insaniak wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It seems a bit unfair really.

Unfair how? Different people want different things.


The trick for any company is simply to find the path that more people approve of.

Unfair because people compare it constantly to games like Warmachine. I've played Warmachine, and I didn't like it for a multitude of reasons. I do not, however, go around to the Warmachine section of the forums and constantly yammer about how I didn't like it, nor do I do so around Warmachine night at my FLGS.

However, it seems like I can't go a day either in Real Life or on the Internet without hearing about how "Game X" is better for "Reason Y" when "Reason not-Y" is decried as a horrible failure after GW gets rid of Y.

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

(Emphasis mine)

I found your issue, you think GW does stuff that is good...

By this I simply mean shoring up the many holes that exist in some of the "weaker" codexes (BA, SoB, C:SM etc.) and balancing some of the more ridiculous units out there like Riptides. Perfect balance is probably an impossibility, but right now there are some things that could be done to even things up a bit. I don't necessarily despise the way the game is going as far as core rules go, but its got a very "free-for-all" feel to it now that I'm not sure I like. Not liking resin is just a personal preference, but I do miss the old metal models and would love a return to them.

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
By this I simply mean shoring up the many holes that exist in some of the "weaker" codexes (BA, SoB, C:SM etc.) and balancing some of the more ridiculous units out there like Riptides. Perfect balance is probably an impossibility, but right now there are some things that could be done to even things up a bit. I don't necessarily despise the way the game is going as far as core rules go, but its got a very "free-for-all" feel to it now that I'm not sure I like. Not liking resin is just a personal preference, but I do miss the old metal models and would love a return to them.

I guarantee you that any change GW makes to anything right now will piss enough people off that we'll have 2 front-page threads about it. That's how it seems lately - those need fixing, but when something's fixed, everyone cries about the manner in which GW fixed it, or really everything except "yay".

It is just that the business decisions that GW have made in the last 10 years make no sense, and also the alienation to their customer base, i love the Imperial knight design but for the money it costs here in Japan i can get a Macross(Robotech) transformable toy with metal parts and i don't have to paint it.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

(Emphasis mine)

I found your issue, you think GW does stuff that is good...

They do good. Lots really. But as soon as I say something good, there is a problem they made that goes along with it.

And to the OP, the scions codex could easily (about 10-15 minutes work) be put in the guard codex, or be released AFTER all the other books where released. There are way better ways of it happening than the way it was done. I think most people would prefer it if no supplements where out yet but all the books had been released before 7th with a bit more effort put into each. Then once that was done supplements and so forth where added for a while until next edition where the cycle goes again. Instead it was all messed up and random.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

(Emphasis mine)

I found your issue, you think GW does stuff that is good...

They do good. Lots really. But as soon as I say something good, there is a problem they made that goes along with it.

And to the OP, the scions codex could easily (about 10-15 minutes work) be put in the guard codex, or be released AFTER all the other books where released. There are way better ways of it happening than the way it was done. I think most people would prefer it if no supplements where out yet but all the books had been released before 7th with a bit more effort put into each. Then once that was done supplements and so forth where added for a while until next edition where the cycle goes again. Instead it was all messed up and random.

That's a fair enough appraisal, I suppose. I kinda liked the old Chapter Approved, which was the epitome of 'messed up and random' rules supplements, but to each his own I suppose.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
By this I simply mean shoring up the many holes that exist in some of the "weaker" codexes (BA, SoB, C:SM etc.) and balancing some of the more ridiculous units out there like Riptides. Perfect balance is probably an impossibility, but right now there are some things that could be done to even things up a bit. I don't necessarily despise the way the game is going as far as core rules go, but its got a very "free-for-all" feel to it now that I'm not sure I like. Not liking resin is just a personal preference, but I do miss the old metal models and would love a return to them.

I guarantee you that any change GW makes to anything right now will piss enough people off that we'll have 2 front-page threads about it. That's how it seems lately - those need fixing, but when something's fixed, everyone cries about the manner in which GW fixed it, or really everything except "yay".

Really though, is that surprising considering the vile reputation GW has built for itself? I truly do believe it considers its customers as some lowly life-form incapable of rational thought beyond the need to buy anything and everything GW releases. It's sickening, but I can't be too upset because I buy all of my models second-hand and usually find some fantastic deals, so they're really only hurting themselves. It's a bizarre company in a bizarre situation.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I get how you feel. I really do.

But it seems whenever GW does something good, its done something worse alongside it. So when the release schedule was faster and so on, it was also more rushed and along with it heaps of what many players would call garbage came with it.

With GW its 1 steps forward 2 steps back.

Thats how I feel anyway. Thats partly why I think people complain a lot too. They just dont do it the way we would think they would and it makes people question it.

(Emphasis mine)

I found your issue, you think GW does stuff that is good...

They do good. Lots really. But as soon as I say something good, there is a problem they made that goes along with it.

And to the OP, the scions codex could easily (about 10-15 minutes work) be put in the guard codex, or be released AFTER all the other books where released. There are way better ways of it happening than the way it was done. I think most people would prefer it if no supplements where out yet but all the books had been released before 7th with a bit more effort put into each. Then once that was done supplements and so forth where added for a while until next edition where the cycle goes again. Instead it was all messed up and random.

That's a fair enough appraisal, I suppose. I kinda liked the old Chapter Approved, which was the epitome of 'messed up and random' rules supplements, but to each his own I suppose.

As I said, 10 ish years ago that tempestus scions book would have been a white dwarf article. But since that road was sealed its doomed to be what it is hence why my example was like that. Otherwise id be thinking its better the white dwarf way too.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I've played Warmachine, and I didn't like it for a multitude of reasons. I do not, however, go around to the Warmachine section of the forums and constantly yammer about how I didn't like it, nor do I do so around Warmachine night at my FLGS.

Why not? If you care about Warmachine, and you want it to be a better game, keeping your criticisms to yourself only makes you part of the problem.

As a consumer, the only power you have in the market is your opinion and your money. Perhaps if more people complained about 40K, and more people abandoned it to play better games, Games Workshop would actually improve their rules.

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
By this I simply mean shoring up the many holes that exist in some of the "weaker" codexes (BA, SoB, C:SM etc.) and balancing some of the more ridiculous units out there like Riptides. Perfect balance is probably an impossibility, but right now there are some things that could be done to even things up a bit. I don't necessarily despise the way the game is going as far as core rules go, but its got a very "free-for-all" feel to it now that I'm not sure I like. Not liking resin is just a personal preference, but I do miss the old metal models and would love a return to them.

I guarantee you that any change GW makes to anything right now will piss enough people off that we'll have 2 front-page threads about it. That's how it seems lately - those need fixing, but when something's fixed, everyone cries about the manner in which GW fixed it, or really everything except "yay".

Really though, is that surprising considering the vile reputation GW has built for itself? I truly do believe it considers its customers as some lowly life-form incapable of rational thought beyond the need to buy anything and everything GW releases. It's sickening, but I can't be too upset because I buy all of my models second-hand and usually find some fantastic deals, so they're really only hurting themselves. It's a bizarre company in a bizarre situation.

I agree that they're pretty fethed, and I'm not surprised at the outrage.

But I think the modern GW is trying to listen to their customers. They put Looted Wagon rules in WD, because of the outcry after it was leaked that it wasn't in the codex. They fixed Challenges in 7th Edition, so I can't feed Guard Sergeants to Bloodthirsters for fifteen combats anymore. I really think GW is actively working to climb out of the grave they dug for themselves, but instead of helping them up, the customers are jeering, hollering, and laughing at every slip.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

I've played Warmachine, and I didn't like it for a multitude of reasons. I do not, however, go around to the Warmachine section of the forums and constantly yammer about how I didn't like it, nor do I do so around Warmachine night at my FLGS.

Why not? If you care about Warmachine, and you want it to be a better game, keeping your criticisms to yourself only makes you part of the problem.

As a consumer, the only power you have in the market is your opinion and your money. Perhaps if more people complained about 40K, and more people abandoned it to play better games, Games Workshop would actually improve their rules.

I voted against WM with my wallet, yes.

And I keep my opinions to myself because people act so offended when I talk about Warmachine negatively. I'll say things like "Combined Fire makes no sense" or "Tracked vehicles will always be better than walkers at a given tech level - have they not developed the Wheel?" and people will honest-to-god be offended and aghast that I dare joke in such a manner!

People also apparently act offended when you talk about 40K negatively. They get offended enough to even make threads about it, apparently.

Many of us who criticize 40K realize that the opinions of others are irrelevant, though. Everyone has different tastes, there are some people who hate things just to hate, there are some people who love things unconditionally and will defend it to the end. Point is, you're a customer. You have the right to voice your opinion on a product at all times; other peoples' sentiments be damned.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
People also apparently act offended when you talk about 40K negatively. They get offended enough to even make threads about it, apparently.

Many of us who criticize 40K realize that the opinions of others are irrelevant, though. Everyone has different tastes, there are some people who hate things just to hate, there are some people who love things unconditionally and will defend it to the end. Point is, you're a customer. You have the right to voice your opinion on a product at all times; other peoples' sentiments be damned.

Haha, I'm not that offended really - more saddened. GW is dying, but rather than mourn it's loss, people would rather piss on its corpse.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Haha, I'm not that offended really - more saddened. GW is dying, but rather than mourn it's loss, people would rather piss on its corpse.

When your teats are sore from over milking, it's hard to empathise with the farmer when he trips over and falls.

It'd be easy for GW to win. Look at what most of their competitors are doing... make games with a realistic barrier to entry, write good rules, support good rules, support the community, encourage the community, give back to the community...

You know, the things they used to do and were the trend setters for the new upstarts.

The product has lost a great deal of it's value and has much lower value compared to other games at this point. High price does not equate to value, either. I'd be a happy customer if they did what I said. I may not like every decision, that's a different and personal case, but if you treated your customers as valued patrons instead of walking wallets who will buy anything with your stamp on it, then you'd be much better off.

And for the argument that we wanted faster rules but now complain that we got them, we wanted faster rules of a certain level of quality that didn't involve price increases and being nickle and dimed with additional content in many different forms. We just wanted codices faster and better rules support. We are getting one with the distinct lack of the other.

Call me optimistic (or sadistic, if you will) but I don't see the end of GW on the horizon just yet. In ten years? Maybe. In five? Unlikely.

Agreed, there is too much negativity.
Gw have done plenty that is worthy of criticism, but really their biggest mistake is their poor communication, it's allowed the 'fans' to become a vocal cesspit of negativity.
They also seem convinced the internet isn't a big deal, which has allowed negative opinion to spread

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Call me optimistic (or sadistic, if you will) but I don't see the end of GW on the horizon just yet. In ten years? Maybe. In five? Unlikely.

You should head over to Dakka Discussions and read the forum more closely. I imagine you're going to see a lot more scrambling, and if things are changed, a much bigger down turn for the 14-15 Fiscal year.

I also recommend you read this 14 part series if you don't think GW is in dire straights:

http://masterminis.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-future-of-games-workshop-part-14.html

((I started with the end because all the links are at the end of the article for easy reading.))

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
But I think the modern GW is trying to listen to their customers. They put Looted Wagon rules in WD, because of the outcry after it was leaked that it wasn't in the codex.

If GW was trying to listen to their customers, they either wouldn't have cut the units from the codexes (multiple units, multiple codexes), or would have released the rules free online. As the rules already existed in the previous codex there's absolutely zero cost to them. Not paid for piecemeal, following the same trend we've been arguing against. But then, there's an entire thread devoted to GW and the concept of "Day one DLC" on this topic.

ahzek wrote:
Agreed, there is too much negativity.
Gw have done plenty that is worthy of criticism

Plenty worthy of criticism... too much criticism...
-_-

 TheKbob wrote:
And for the argument that we wanted faster rules but now complain that we got them, we wanted faster rules of a certain level of quality that didn't involve price increases and being nickle and dimed with additional content in many different forms. We just wanted codices faster and better rules support. We are getting one with the distinct lack of the other.

I agree with this point. Some decisions of GW, I cannot make sense of it. My experience would be the SoB codex. Why a half hearted update (which they charged for it through Black Library) when a rework could have been possible. Perhaps they didn't want to do anything new without new models? I wouldn't know. But they have released a new Edition in a short time, whereas allowing SoB to languish in a semi-reworked state.