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.

Hi people. I hate and wouldn't want to be another one of ''those guys'', but since the release of 8ed, I've been mostly silent, and I just feel like I need to talk about it (who knows, maybe other people's perspective could change my mindset in a positive way).

So, when GW released their primaris SM, I was like "oh, a super SM", okay, guesse that's "original". I didn't thought much about it. After all, super space marines should be quite rare on the battlefield compared to regular space marines, right ? They should cost way more in points and thus constitute a small part of a space marine army list. Hell, since they are so super, they would probably be non-troop choice, right ? I got it all wrong of course.

All primaris list is way more common that I expected. Hell, I hardly even see regular marines (except smash captains and bikers). But hey, it's okay, people get to play what they want. Playing an army of super super humans isn't any different than playing custodes or GK (at least during 5th edition).

But then... came the vanguard...

I must confess, I discovered w40k when I was in high school in the early 2000's. I was at a gaming store and saw the Mythic Dawn of War game. The cover looked interesting. But then I got a look at the back. And this is when I fell in love with 40k. There was a bloodthirster. And space marines. Seeing this blend of fantasy and sci-fi at the same time, that was unimaginable for the uncultured naive young teenager I was back then. And the gothic look if it all.

I couldn't buy the game, of course. Back then, parents didn't bought every last tech gadget or game their children wanted (as opposed to today where kids not even in high school already have an Xbobx account, a cellphone, and all that other *$**).

However, I got a cd for the demo (which only covered the first mission). What a glorious experience it was ! Gabriel Angelos swinging his sword, the grim look of the fortress monastery, the sinister dreadnought (the concept was morbid as a teenager), the religious catchphrase the units would shout. It was all perfect.
To make it short, I fell in love with the grimdark and the gothic vibe.

Now let's look at today. Can anyone tell me what is grimdark or gothic about a phobos captain model ? Hell, the servo-skull coming with him is more gothic and grim than the marine himself. The primaris invictor warsuit and the redemptor dreadnought look like villains from a bad Robocop movie. Hell, the SM are becoming more tacticool and vanilla sci-fi than the T'au.

I feel like the game is changing in a drastic way. Maybe not rulewise (I actually like the 8ed format), but in its fluff. This isn't the grimdark setting I knew. This is just some regular space odyssey with giant supermen with starcraft-esque armours battling inferior monstrous enemies.

To most competitive players, this doesn't matter. They play to win. Hell, I even know a few who never bothered learning about the fluff of their SM army. I told myself to just adapt to the changing times and stop being so immature, and that maybe this evolution of things would grew on me.

However, GW tacticool ghost recon SM fetish finally hammered the last nail in the coffin for me when they remade Shrike.

I know some people might find him cool, and I am not here to argue about your tastes. Bt this clearly told me that it was the end. There is nothing remotely W40k about this model in my eyes. It's just some emo dude wearing a vanilla powered suit that could have been seen in an Avengers movie.

Since GW clearly wants to make pre-8ed marines and the overall grimdark fade in the background, I sincerely think about just scrapping it all up. I might wait to see how the sisters of battle will be (since they seem to still fit the old vibe), but besides that, w40k seriously dropped in my list of favorite game (setting-wise).

What's your take on the subject ?

I think that GW has released a new cool space marine model for marine players. I don't read all that far into it - also I note that whilst many keep saying that the "grimdark is gone" its also at a time that a new Crusade has launched; Cadia has fallen; the Imperium is torn in half and everything is steadily slipping to Hell.

Tyranids have been driven back once again, but only just and the result is still a second marine chapter almost totally annihilated in the war. Meanwhile Tiamat is building some kind of superplanet construct for purposes totally unknown at present. Then you've got the Genestealer Cults arising on many worlds to the point where they are no longer a background distraction, but now organised powerful military forces capable of overthrowing worlds far in advance of the swarms approach.

Orks are making rumblings that they might be building toward a mega-WARGH with hints that we might see primal/ancient/prime orks arise to lead it.

Tau are striking out and gaining more and more territories and growing as a new threat to the solidarity of the Imperium.

Eldar are running around and partly uniting; a fragmented shattered race steadily gaining some power even in these dark times and that could easily rise up to manipulate the Imperium in ways that they've never done before.



Honestly I think the real difference is that some mature fans ahve build a mental image of the grimdark that was SO grimdark it was never actually true. Even back in the early days the Imperium had hope. It had a chance to win. It had insurmountable odds against it that it overcame. And yet for all that they are still losing the war at large; they are still only treding water. Heck they've brought back one of the great lords of the Marines to help respark the engine of war and unleash primaris marines and even that hasn't actually turned the tide of war (in fact since they've appeared Cadia fell, the Imperium got cut in half and such).

Yeah, maybe it's just me getting old and having this whole ''back in my days everything was better'' mentality. I guess we must all go throught it at some point.

Still, I think I'll stay away from SM armies for a while (or at least the newer models). I'll stick with necrons and CSM (at least they still fit my tastes). Hell, maybe even go the extra mile and start a Slaanesh army.

 Khornate25 wrote:
Yeah, maybe it's just me getting old and having this whole ''back in my days everything was better'' mentality. I guess we must all go throught it at some point.

Still, I think I'll stay away from SM armies for a while (or at least the newer models). I'll stick with necrons and CSM (at least they still fit my tastes). Hell, maybe even go the extra mile and start a Slaanesh army.

As someone building a Slaanesh force I'd say go for it!
Chaos have had some really fantastic models released as of late and if I were into building another 40K army I'd be very interested in building a Chaos force with all those new warp beast machines they've got!

Or you could even jump ship and come to AoS - the new Bone Construct army is out; or you can go REALLY slaanesh with a Slaanesh demons army. Deamonettes, vast keepers of secrets, fiends and all! In AoS the 4 Chaos gods can field their own whole army force not just be one cog of a unity. With the base changes only the Seekers are on different bases between the two games (and honestly the bike-bases are odd looking on seekers and the cavalry bases from AoS are better).



But yeah chances are you've build a mental image and are running on a nostalgic view that isn't quite true. You might even try some of the Black Library works, reading some classic stories and reading some newer ones. It might be a fresh injection of actual lore and writing could help you.

Inhate how the Xenos are getting the short stick. Even more then usual. The IoM got Primaries and TWO whole new entire fething armys. The Custodes and SoS not to mention a god damn Primarch. Chaoa actually had a succusful Black Crusade for the first time ever and managed to assualt freaking Terra itself. Meanwhile what have ANY of the xenos done during that time? What new Xenos armys or major fluff devolpments. I mean the focus has always been on Choas and IoM but the Xenos got shafted even more then usual this time. And that doesnt aeem to be changing. There doesnt seem to be any major plot devlopements for any of the xen0s OTHER then the Eldar in the future.

chimera0205 wrote:
Inhate how the Xenos are getting the short stick. Even more then usual. The IoM got Primaries and TWO whole new entire fething armys. The Custodes and SoS not to mention a god damn Primarch. Chaoa actually had a succusful Black Crusade for the first time ever and managed to assualt freaking Terra itself. Meanwhile what have ANY of the xenos done during that time? What new Xenos armys or major fluff devolpments. I mean the focus has always been on Choas and IoM but the Xenos got shafted even more then usual this time. And that doesnt aeem to be changing. There doesnt seem to be any major plot devlopements for any of the xen0s OTHER then the Eldar in the future.

Didn't the GSC get triggered into a fullblown Revolution attempt?

I think the thing is that you've developed a set of habits in relation to 40k and now that you're done with it the habits remain. When those sour and you need to tell everyone how bad it is or where GW went wrong that's when you need to work on building new habits. At least that's how I'm thinking about it right now. I think the people who enjoy it should enjoy it and I need to figure out how to move on.

chimera0205 wrote:
Inhate how the Xenos are getting the short stick. Even more then usual. The IoM got Primaries and TWO whole new entire fething armys. The Custodes and SoS not to mention a god damn Primarch. Chaoa actually had a succusful Black Crusade for the first time ever and managed to assualt freaking Terra itself. Meanwhile what have ANY of the xenos done during that time? What new Xenos armys or major fluff devolpments. I mean the focus has always been on Choas and IoM but the Xenos got shafted even more then usual this time. And that doesnt aeem to be changing. There doesnt seem to be any major plot devlopements for any of the xen0s OTHER then the Eldar in the future.

new xenos army? we got Genestealer cults. thing is that in 40k we have a lot of Imperial stuff in the background that can easily be spun into it's own army. with xenos we got..... help me out here, is there a single xenos race GW could make a new army out of? xenos races with considerable background development IN THE MATERIAL ALREADY?
the answer is "not really" Tau I suppose could be expanded easily eneugh. but...

The lore isn't really changing. In Dark Imperium we see Guilliman try to introduce this tacticool, reasonable attitude to the Imperium and facing huge resistance, having to compromise and accepting some amount of grimdark into his program in order to keep the Imperium together.

And if you look at the model range, the Sisters of Battle look plenty gothic. New chaos is plenty grimdark aesthetically, and looks fantastic IMHO. Genestealer cults are plenty grimdark. Reading the fluff recently we've got suicide bombers on every side, a horrific plague war which is in line with Vraks and other depictions of guard life, etc.

Yes, the primaris space marines are aesthetically distinct from the oldmarines, particularly they are less gothic and more sleek (except the tanks which are derpy overgunned monstrosities). That is perfectly in line with what they are in-lore, and in-lore they are an anomaly which has not moved the needle all that much for the rest of the setting in terms of grimdarkness.

Yes Primaris are less aesthetically gothic than some previous generations of marines, but if you're worried that the overall model range is avoiding grimdark, here's a model they revealed a couple days ago:

 Danielle Rae wrote:
The lore isn't really changing. In Dark Imperium we see Guilliman try to introduce this tacticool, reasonable attitude to the Imperium and facing huge resistance, having to compromise and accepting some amount of grimdark into his program in order to keep the Imperium together.

And if you look at the model range, the Sisters of Battle look plenty gothic. New chaos is plenty grimdark aesthetically, and looks fantastic IMHO. Genestealer cults are plenty grimdark. Reading the fluff recently we've got suicide bombers on every side, a horrific plague war which is in line with Vraks and other depictions of guard life, etc.

Yes, the primaris space marines are aesthetically distinct from the oldmarines, particularly they are less gothic and more sleek (except the tanks which are derpy overgunned monstrosities). That is perfectly in line with what they are in-lore, and in-lore they are an anomaly whiich has not moved the needle all that much for the rest of the setting in terms of grimdarkness.

Yeah, maybe it's just me that needs to look at the bigger picture.

The CSM and Sisters do indeed keep the whole grimdark gothic vibe alive. I'll probably pick up the new sister set upcoming in the future.

BrianDavion wrote:
new xenos army? we got Genestealer cults. thing is that in 40k we have a lot of Imperial stuff in the background that can easily be spun into it's own army. with xenos we got..... help me out here, is there a single xenos race GW could make a new army out of? xenos races with considerable background development IN THE MATERIAL ALREADY?
the answer is "not really" Tau I suppose could be expanded easily eneugh. but...

The Q'orl could be made into a playable xenos faction. With their semi-willingness to make alliances with other races, their connection to Chaos, and the fluff about them possibly acquiring warp travel, there's alot that could be done with them.

 Khornate25 wrote:

 Danielle Rae wrote:
The lore isn't really changing. In Dark Imperium we see Guilliman try to introduce this tacticool, reasonable attitude to the Imperium and facing huge resistance, having to compromise and accepting some amount of grimdark into his program in order to keep the Imperium together.

And if you look at the model range, the Sisters of Battle look plenty gothic. New chaos is plenty grimdark aesthetically, and looks fantastic IMHO. Genestealer cults are plenty grimdark. Reading the fluff recently we've got suicide bombers on every side, a horrific plague war which is in line with Vraks and other depictions of guard life, etc.

Yes, the primaris space marines are aesthetically distinct from the oldmarines, particularly they are less gothic and more sleek (except the tanks which are derpy overgunned monstrosities). That is perfectly in line with what they are in-lore, and in-lore they are an anomaly whiich has not moved the needle all that much for the rest of the setting in terms of grimdarkness.

Yeah, maybe it's just me that needs to look at the bigger picture.

The CSM and Sisters do indeed keep the whole grimdark gothic vibe alive. I'll probably pick up the new sister set upcoming in the future.

It's not an uncommon sentiment, and I can see why it would suck to see your faction moving away from the aesthetic you prefer. But yeah the new sisters are legiiiiit

After I'm done my night lords they're my next pick. Mine are gonna look prett yweird tho cuz I'm gonna kitbash them with some Escher bitz to make an undisciplined frontier order stuck in the dark imperium.

I really just want to play Horus Heresy. But no one plays it and I didn't rediscover 40k until 8E.

HH is everything I want out of 40k aesthetically. I hope they update the rules to 8E or something.

I started disliking new lore around the time necrons were revamped into space tomb kings. And then things continued to get worse from there. I definitely think the initial Dawn of War era is my idea of iconic 40k. Things feel different now, on one hand we are getting things I despise like primaris, primarchs returning etc. But on the other hand we are getting aeronautica imperialis and other stuff like sisters of battle which distinctly capture the feel I had been looking for.

 Thargrim wrote:
Things feel different now, on one hand we are getting things I despise like primaris, primarchs returning etc. But on the other hand we are getting aeronautica imperialis and other stuff like sisters of battle which distinctly capture the feel I had been looking for.

I genuinely think they are trying to appeal to both camps. It makes sense that 40k space marines are the ones getting the most generic styling with the widest possible mainstream appeal. Space marines are their most popular line and if they can appeal to kids with the Primaris aesthetic, it gives them a good chance at potentially securing some lifelong customers.

On the other hand, the more expensive, less accessible specialist stuff like Titanicus or the niche factions like Sisters both definitely retain the baroque, gothic aesthetic, which might appeal more to an older crowd.

This isn't quite a background thread so I'll shift this to general

I don't think you're wrong really. Marines are much less grimdark/gothic with the new models and more tacticool especially with the phobos models but even the other marines are basically very clean cut.

Now, I don't think that's wrong per say, I actually kinda like the tacticool but its there. I actually think the new scion models for guard look a bit more gothic with their armor and set up. So could just be an evolution for Marines, we'll need to keep an eye how the line keeps progressing.

 slave.entity wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:
Things feel different now, on one hand we are getting things I despise like primaris, primarchs returning etc. But on the other hand we are getting aeronautica imperialis and other stuff like sisters of battle which distinctly capture the feel I had been looking for.

I genuinely think they are trying to appeal to both camps. It makes sense that 40k space marines are the ones getting the most generic styling with the widest possible mainstream appeal. Space marines are their most popular line and if they can appeal to kids with the Primaris aesthetic, it gives them a good chance at potentially securing some lifelong customers.

On the other hand, the more expensive, less accessible specialist stuff like Titanicus or the niche factions like Sisters both definitely retain the baroque, gothic aesthetic, which might appeal more to an older crowd.

Ok but here's the thing. Was Games Workshop really having trouble selling Space Marines? Everything I've heard points to "No." Apparently they've outsold everything else, since like, forever. I'm not sure Space Marines needed a redesign in order to capture new audiences. It feels more like they needed to redesign Space Marines to sell them again to the same audience.

This is all conjecture, but yeah I think trying to expand your audience is the strategy most companies will use when they think about growth.

thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant. and it's not like Primaris Marnes have no grimdark. the redemptor dread fluff is pretty grimdark, for example.

I don't know I'm not a huge fan of the redemptor fluff, feels more OMG the power !!. Putting your vets into a promised death machine. I mean I guess knowing they'll melt into goo is grim but I'd say a regular dread is more grim dark with knowing how they degrade and basically could live almost forever seemingly like the emperor trapped in their own personal throne to protect humanity.

Just opinion on that front though seems a dumb waste of experience all things considered. Though it does match the dune crawler fluff for how they change out their engine, which is a vanguard skittari.

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok but here's the thing. Was Games Workshop really having trouble selling Space Marines? Everything I've heard points to "No." Apparently they've outsold everything else, since like, forever. I'm not sure Space Marines needed a redesign in order to capture new audiences. It feels more like they needed to redesign Space Marines to sell them again to the same audience.

Notice how GW has actually been producing (some of) the things people have been asking for for more than a decade? One of those things was properly sized space marines.

They could have just made normal space marines bigger, but they'd be just as incompatible as Primaris Marines are with oldmarines, part-wise. They gave them improved rules and statlines so that people with marine armies could justify buying 'bigger, better' marines rather than 'marines that look bigger but are mechanically identical to the ones I own and have already painted'. Truescaling old marines also would have taken years to get every kit through the production schedule and would have tanked the sales of old marines as people probably would have just waited for truescale to come for their favorite unit.

While the fluff reasons might not be to a lot of people's liking, GW's method of truescaling Space Marines was well thought out.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

They do have winged skulls on their armor but I do not recall them bearing the aquila on the chest. Compare any new primaris artwork to the old black templars, dark angels, sm with ultras on the cover, etc codexes from the 2000s and the difference is clear as day to me.

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

They do have winged skulls on their armor but I do not recall them bearing the aquila on the chest. Compare any new primaris artwork to the old black templars, dark angels, sm with ultras on the cover, etc codexes from the 2000s and the difference is clear as day to me.

a slightly differant aquillia doesn't prove anything. space marine devestators lack the aquilla all together. as do mk3 and 4 armor. the decoration on marine armor tends to vary, even within the same mark. that doesn't really change anything. I'm not claiming the armor is exactly the same obviously, just that people claiming it lacks any gothic 40k elements are well.. wrong (or they don't know what gothic means)

BrianDavion wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

They do have winged skulls on their armor but I do not recall them bearing the aquila on the chest. Compare any new primaris artwork to the old black templars, dark angels, sm with ultras on the cover, etc codexes from the 2000s and the difference is clear as day to me.

a slightly differant aquillia doesn't prove anything. space marine devestators lack the aquilla all together. as do mk3 and 4 armor. the decoration on marine armor tends to vary, even within the same mark. that doesn't really change anything. I'm not claiming the armor is exactly the same obviously, just that people claiming it lacks any gothic 40k elements are well.. wrong (or they don't know what gothic means)

Maybe this can highlight the difference i'm seeing and feeling going on.


If you ask me one of these certainly looks better than the other, and has the gritty detail I would normally associate with 40k.

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

They do have winged skulls on their armor but I do not recall them bearing the aquila on the chest. Compare any new primaris artwork to the old black templars, dark angels, sm with ultras on the cover, etc codexes from the 2000s and the difference is clear as day to me.

a slightly differant aquillia doesn't prove anything. space marine devestators lack the aquilla all together. as do mk3 and 4 armor. the decoration on marine armor tends to vary, even within the same mark. that doesn't really change anything. I'm not claiming the armor is exactly the same obviously, just that people claiming it lacks any gothic 40k elements are well.. wrong (or they don't know what gothic means)

Maybe this can highlight the difference i'm seeing and feeling going on.

Spoiler:

If you ask me one of these certainly looks better than the other, and has the gritty detail I would normally associate with 40k.

It's funny, the baroque elements are often times still there, but just really 'cleaned up' or otherwise minimized. The Redemptor still has the aquila and the purity seal but the visual emphasis on both elements is substantially reduced compared to some of the older dreads.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

Ok, so that's one thing mentioned by the OP. But just one. Another one is "techy tacticool", which the OP specifically calls out with the Phobos. I'd put "techy tacticool" as decidedly "less gothic", btw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 John Prins wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:


Ok but here's the thing. Was Games Workshop really having trouble selling Space Marines? Everything I've heard points to "No." Apparently they've outsold everything else, since like, forever. I'm not sure Space Marines needed a redesign in order to capture new audiences. It feels more like they needed to redesign Space Marines to sell them again to the same audience.

Notice how GW has actually been producing (some of) the things people have been asking for for more than a decade? One of those things was properly sized space marines.

They could have just made normal space marines bigger, but they'd be just as incompatible as Primaris Marines are with oldmarines, part-wise. They gave them improved rules and statlines so that people with marine armies could justify buying 'bigger, better' marines rather than 'marines that look bigger but are mechanically identical to the ones I own and have already painted'. Truescaling old marines also would have taken years to get every kit through the production schedule and would have tanked the sales of old marines as people probably would have just waited for truescale to come for their favorite unit.

While the fluff reasons might not be to a lot of people's liking, GW's method of truescaling Space Marines was well thought out.

Ehhh, Primaris are taking years to push out, and it's possible sales for the classics has tanked during that time. Plus, they didn't simply add "truescale marines", they wrote in "marine replacements" with a dozen new units that I'm not sure anyone was asking for.

On top of that, they did truescale Chaos just fine, but to a different scale than Primaris.

To top it all off, the old kits are pretty compatable with the Primaris anyways, do just upscaling marines slightly teally shouldnt have been an issue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Thargrim wrote:

Maybe this can highlight the difference i'm seeing and feeling going on.

Spoiler:

If you ask me one of these certainly looks better than the other, and has the gritty detail I would normally associate with 40k.

That's a really good example of the 'feeling'.

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Thargrim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
thing iis Primaris Marines aren't THAT aesteticly differant.

Different enough, obviously.

they are but they're not noticably more or less gothic then normal marines. they still have sculpted eagles on their armor, and have relic boxes dangling from their belts. they're differant but not because GW "removed the gothic"

They do have winged skulls on their armor but I do not recall them bearing the aquila on the chest. Compare any new primaris artwork to the old black templars, dark angels, sm with ultras on the cover, etc codexes from the 2000s and the difference is clear as day to me.

a slightly differant aquillia doesn't prove anything. space marine devestators lack the aquilla all together. as do mk3 and 4 armor. the decoration on marine armor tends to vary, even within the same mark. that doesn't really change anything. I'm not claiming the armor is exactly the same obviously, just that people claiming it lacks any gothic 40k elements are well.. wrong (or they don't know what gothic means)

Maybe this can highlight the difference i'm seeing and feeling going on.

Spoiler:

If you ask me one of these certainly looks better than the other, and has the gritty detail I would normally associate with 40k.

except thats not every marine ever made is it? and it's scertainly not represented on the armor. I could selectivly choose pictures to make it look like primaris have more details etc.

watch




I mean that ultramarine in the lower picture (yes I know it's from a video game) is honestly a pretty accurate depiction of what a normal MK 7 marine min looks like.