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.

Kanluwen wrote:
I like how you put out this great big explanation as to why you're not a "hater", and then immediately insinuate that the "apologists" do not have complaints or issues with the company.

Surely that is what an apologist is by definition...

If you're defending yourself here from some implied slight, Kan, you're in no way an GW apologist, a fanboy maybe but an apologist you are not. To see a real GW apologist in the wild I suggest you swing by my hometown sometime. Then I can show you one that makes you look like a "hater"


Now, to post something OT in this thread:

White Dwarf, it's fallen so far from grace it's silly. I look back at some of the battered old tatty issues I had and wonder where it all went wrong. UK WD 222 was my first with Nick Davis' amazing Lizardmen terrain articles which ran for a few issues which set me on the way for knowing what materials to use for building my own cheap, good looking terrain. Tale of 4 gamers was in full swing in this issue too.
Lots of good memories there. Now, there are a lot of things that we have grown out of as the veteran hobbyist, but there were a lot of useful things in many issues that I still use to this day. WD now simply does not even try to pretend it's not a catalogue. In the Fat Bloke days you had player's own armies, good battle reports, and wonderful articles, some of them not even from the WD staff, remember Mike Walker's wonderful articles about the trails and tribulations of his gaming circle?

Where a lot of people say WD "jumped the shark" as it were was the infamous Giant Issue (UK 316 IIRC) where 99% of the mag was taken over by the new plastic giant, the only release of that month. Every. Single. Article was pimping this new kit, even the battle report with the much maligned "stomp o meter" IIRC. Ironically this was a WD that included new rules that allowed certain armies to use a giant as a Dogs of War unit. Go figure.

Kanluwen wrote:
I like how you put out this great big explanation as to why you're not a "hater", and then immediately insinuate that the "apologists" do not have complaints or issues with the company.

The reason people get labeled as "haters" is because they actively come into threads just to post how much they dislike something that has been done or how X company has done it better than Y, and they purposely do it in such a way that it is certain to start a debate which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Have you (and the mods) ever consider the exact principle applies to how people gets labelled as white knights?

Jamumools wrote:Yeah that is the ultimate plan. I suppose I figured if no-one moans, they'll never change anything...

People moan a lot and often, but GW stopped listening ages ago.

13 year olds with mom's credit card and hopefully new to wargamign are the target demographic

The kiddos think everthing is da bomb111 and arent old enough to know what WD once was so they have no point of comparison to complain about.

Guys like you and I don't even figure into their buisness plan anymore...

Kanluwen wrote:I can't speak for you...

But I simply don't buy it. I have Fine Scale Modeler for my modeling fix. And even that is starting to trend towards being what Lord_Blackfang says in his post:
Come a certain point, you just don't need the information in it anymore.

So you honestly believe that the White Dwarf on sale now is at a similar standard to those released previously (prior to 312, or the 'Giant Issue') ?

Please don't be so obstinate.. I think it speaks volumes that even GW staff (nay, upper management) have expressed displeasure with it, yet you think it's down to some kind of subjective difference in the reader!

I loved the Dave Morris articles on demons in RuneQuest -- I think they were around issue #35 or #45 or so.

Pacific wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I can't speak for you...

But I simply don't buy it. I have Fine Scale Modeler for my modeling fix. And even that is starting to trend towards being what Lord_Blackfang says in his post:
Come a certain point, you just don't need the information in it anymore.

So you honestly believe that the White Dwarf on sale now is at a similar standard to those released previously (prior to 312, or the 'Giant Issue') ?

Please don't be so obstinate.. I think it speaks volumes that even GW staff (nay, upper management) have expressed displeasure with it, yet you think it's down to some kind of subjective difference in the reader!

I think we're getting some wires crossed here, Pacific.

I just do not spend my money on White Dwarf. I don't feel it is worth the money.

Yup OK sorry Kan, that came across as slightly harsh!

I think WD could potentially work across several different levels - one of these is in providing insight and instruction into the modelling or wargaming world. And, perhaps as both youn and Lord Blackfang have pointed out, that is never going to be of service to everybody, especially the more experienced among us.

Another way, and I think this is perhaps most important, would be in just having good journalism in the magazine, articles which are well written and enjoyable to read. I would say this is the biggest area in which the magazine has slipped, and unfortunately it is the one area where it can provide something that is generally not easy to find on the internet.

I guess people want different things from a magazine - I want GW to start paying professional journalists and hobbyists to start writing articles again, and something that can provide me with toilet-reading material that lasts for at least a week! Really, I think that is the only benchmark against which the 'quality' of the magazine can be measured.

Generally, I enjoy White Dwarf. GENERALLY.

I am not going into it expecting a great deal, hopefully some distracting rules or, at the very least an interesting battle report.

Now by interesting, I mean one that I can read through and enjoy. I'm not looking for high-level tournament play, or maximized lists or any of that kind of stuff. And I am certainly not interested in the kinds of battle reports that I might read here. Now this is not to bash on the reports on Dakka Dakka, most are pretty darn good, but they are a different thing than a WD report. I'm happy with just something that gives me a report to read will usually do it. The rest of the stuff I either browse at, or just ignore. So on the whole, I'm mostly ambivalent about White Dwarf, but I'll still buy usually.

THAT SAID

The last 3-4 months of WD have been very bad. As a person who reads them for interesting battle reports, they have been utter garbage.

I was just thinking today that I would rather read one of jy2s or mercer's batreps instead of the ones in WD, then I thought that I wouldn't actually. I get to see units and characters being used in the WD reports that I wouldn't normally get to see, who cares if it is uncompetitive and trying to sell the models, I like seeing combinations and units that I can't normally see, either on here or at home (because my brother and I and our mates tend to pick quite competitive armies).

motyak wrote:I was just thinking today that I would rather read one of jy2s or mercer's batreps instead of the ones in WD, then I thought that I wouldn't actually. I get to see units and characters being used in the WD reports that I wouldn't normally get to see, who cares if it is uncompetitive and trying to sell the models, I like seeing combinations and units that I can't normally see, either on here or at home (because my brother and I and our mates tend to pick quite competitive armies).

Exactly. Plus, and let me be totally shallow here, but a White Dwarf battle report has far better photography and (usually) better writing than a Dakka battle report. Again, they are different things. I don't read WD reports for tactical advise, and I don't read dakka reports for crisp photography and a bit of narrative spun into it. That said, the reports in WD for the past 2-3 months have just been slapdash and uninteresting in terms of their production.

I'd like to make a point of contention here.

It's one thing to say that White Dwarf is bad. Sure, the internet is easily a better resource, and as someone who still reads WD I'll be the first to admit that most of it is advertising nonsense, with many of the articles lacking a serious depth.

However, I'd like to point out that, despite all these things, I mainly keep White Dwarf around as "hobby-pr0nz", occasionally WD has a decent article or two that I'd like to keep around. While I'm not going to argue that WD's articles are "good", I'd like to say that it's childish to assume that everyone who buys WD must be some sort of imbecile who is either juvenile and ignorant or is simply a GW fanboy.

I buy WD. It sucks, but I like to have it around. Not everyone who buys WD is somehow ignorant of the better articles on the internet.

Yeah, a little OT, but I feel like I needed to qualify some statements. WD's far from what it used to be in terms of quality, and it definitely needs a brush up, but making assumptions about the people who buy WD is another topic entirely.

Fat Bloke come back, everything is forgiven! Seriously, the battle reports under Paul Sawyer was what got me hooked on 40K.

I see what happened to their Catalogues. I remember the 2010 Catalogue.

Lots of people on here are saying 'I can get everything that is in White Dwarf online'. To me, that indicates a possibility for WD to expand into an area which other publications or websites simply cannot deliver. Primarily: developer and designer notes.

Many WD's have a hint of this kind of thing, but I would really like to see a full, in depth, 3 solid pages of text description. 'We created this new unit in the Fast Attack slot because...' . The last WD I remember reading which had real, reasoned discussion about the codex rules was... the Dark Elf errata in 6th edition? Similarly they have the artists, sculptors and authors.

actually, the latest one have seriously gone down hill fast, again since kendrick took over as editor, the one before that weren't as good as others, but at least they weren't this mind-numbingly boring

come on I want less small 'this is how you paint _ on this model' and more "This is how you can paint this model" or "This is how you can paint realistic lenses"
Heck, I want more WD exclusive stuff that ISN'T just showing off the new paint range, yeah I get that new colours means it will be a bit harder, but they've already given us a comparison chart, so whats the fething point?

I used to get GW religiously every month, had subscriptions & had every issue back to 136.

Not anymore. I cancelled my sub last year, and haven't bought a single issue since, simply because there is nothing in it for me anymore.

Gone are the days of short stories, in depth battle reports, conversions, readers armies, random fun stuff, etc all replaced with endless pictures of the same stuff, insipid reports, bland & pointless non-articles & a zillion pages of pointless, wasted space at the back.

I recently decided to have a clear out of some recent issues as they were just taking up space, and I ended up getting rid of about 2 years worth of WD's. I decided to pull out the bits Worth keeping - from all those magazines, I ended up (page wise) with less than the page count of 1 WD worth keeping. Thinking about it, for 2 years, that's really quite pathetic.

I really hope that they do intend to improve WD, I really, really do, but as people have already said, we've heard it all before, and it's getting old. It really seems that since GW discovered fun couldn't be Trade Marked or Copyrighted, they don't bother with it, and don't want people reading about it either (personal opinion).

I guess I am A GW hater, to some extent. I don't hate there universes, or the fluff or the models, I just hate what the company has become & how they do business these days.

CT GAMER wrote:

Jamumools wrote:Yeah that is the ultimate plan. I suppose I figured if no-one moans, they'll never change anything...

People moan a lot and often, but GW stopped listening ages ago.

13 year olds with mom's credit card and hopefully new to wargamign are the target demographic

The kiddos think everthing is da bomb111 and arent old enough to know what WD once was so they have no point of comparison to complain about.

Guys like you and I don't even figure into their buisness plan anymore...

Exactly the same sentiment that some of my friends have said to me, when I told them I'd gone back to miniatures. And it's such a shame.

From memory, and it's an old creaky memory...

I remember seeing something that GW isn't classed as a magazine, but actually as a catalogue to take advantage on postal costs/tax breaks or something.

So in otherwords they cut content/quality, so no advertising or articles on competitors products, raise the price and tell us that they're increasing the 'value' of the magazine by concentrating on what we want.

So no change in their marketing strategy there then.

Cheers

Andrew

They are pushing alot of Lord of the rings sort of stuff right now because the hobbit movie but think back when you found it in the 80s or 90s. You thought it was "the bomb" as well but when you got older you didnt like it as much. It is the same with movies for me. I suggest that you ride the wave and just deal with the current WD staff they will get better as time gose on. I used to hate Matt Ward until the recent Necron Codex being so balanced. (Just hope it stays that way)
One last thing, I have not bought a WD in a while because the store manager lets us read them in the store.

What does it take for GW to get off its duff and just rehash the old format of the mag?

Even to the point of just the early redbacks, the book is not beyond repair, it is just lazy actions from the clueless as to why it is so bad now that it is a joke.

They could even go one better, book back to the early days of the mag and even .... talk about something OTHER then just how great finecrast is, or how much of nothing jervs gots to say.

The early 100's are pure gold if you really want to see how far the book has fallen to the darkside.


I truly miss those days. Now, looking back on the mags reminds me more of what was going on around the game, then just the mags themselves. THEN we can go on about how and what sucks, but that talk is getting old, by so much now.

I really want to like new content, but as of a couple of months back, I am just out and out dreading it. There is nothing that is really knocking my socks off about GW's... flagship...er... games.

Even back to alternative rules/ models. cardstock stuff, rebates, cupons, gimmicks that would actually be worth the paper they are printed on, metals once in awhile.



... I can dream I guess.