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.

 insaniak wrote:

Voss wrote:

 CMLR wrote:
Funny how everyone is using this as the only point of reference when we have Astarters II coming up.

Ok, you probably won't like hearing this, but Astartes 1 was a fairly dull sizzle reel. Its a _very_ good advertisement for getting the animator's skills noticed by a studio, but as a show or story, its a ball of nothing.
Astartes II is probably the least potentially interesting thing in the whole line up, and that's after seeing the low-budget corner cuts of Hammer and Bolter.

Story wise, Astartes took a while to get going... but what it was, was a beautifully animated and scored piece of work that was possibly the first animation that really got the size and nature of Marines right. Something along that line would have been a much better advertisement for Warhammer+ than this half-hearted attempt was.

Pretty much this. Astartes was cool, if you knew gw history and what spacemarines are.

Now give me the Lord inquisitor level of animation and story scope ( ahhh what could if been) and I would be interested. Or something like Titanicus.
I was never the target audience for this product but meh even by GW's usual half ass standards this was bad.
I give the app two years before some middle manager or board member takes wh+ their pet project and scraps it for version 2.0 with a higher monthly fee and less options.

Lord Kragan wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Voss wrote:


Lore videos are honestly... whatever. They've been recycling the same old stuff for decades now. Listening to some rando read through material an order of magnitude slower than I can read it is just a turn off.
The rest of it has even less value.

and if THAT is all their lore video is, yeah it'll suck. as I said the one strength GW has in this is they make the lore. so they can literally reveal never before known factoids etc, something the youtube lore channels can't do. they can bring in authors etc and ask them questions that WILL get answers. if they lean into this power, they'll stand out (not eneugh to be worth subscribing all by itself mind you as those factoids will swiftly be regurgitated by the youtube lore channels) the quality of the videos will certainl be key.

That would be a horrible strategy. Warmahordes' lore suffered greatly due to several key elements being locked behind obscure sources. Putting them in random clips of videos? No thanks.

sure if they locked down KEY stuff behind the videos that'd be a problem, but additional details that only dedicated fans would care about anyway? not a bad idea.

Astartes looked nice, but was pretty boring.

Who remembers the game ICO?

Silent Story Telling is a thing and whilst some people love it, others hate it. It can leave people rather divided on if something is good or bad. Astartes is basically silent story telling. So you have to make up some of the parts in between and mystery is part of the whole experience.

You'll either love it or you'll hate it or you'll just not get it.

What are people's thoughts on Angels of Death?

The animation and models themselves look pretty good (although the facial expressions seem to be multiplied x10 and look goofy).
But the colour palette looks really bad to me. The red is way too vibrant and the contrast makes it harder to follow sometimes.

 Overread wrote:
Who remembers the game ICO?

Silent Story Telling is a thing and whilst some people love it, others hate it. It can leave people rather divided on if something is good or bad. Astartes is basically silent story telling. So you have to make up some of the parts in between and mystery is part of the whole experience.

You'll either love it or you'll hate it or you'll just not get it.

Just because two different things (game/animated series) use a similar technique doesn't mean they are of the same quality. Ico also benefits from interactive storytelling, it being a game. Astartes also needs to be really good to deserve that comparison. This is not just about some people (dis-)liking some narrative technique.

Ico is a cult classic. Do you really think Astartes is comparable to that game besides some technicality?

Mario wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Who remembers the game ICO?

Silent Story Telling is a thing and whilst some people love it, others hate it. It can leave people rather divided on if something is good or bad. Astartes is basically silent story telling. So you have to make up some of the parts in between and mystery is part of the whole experience.

You'll either love it or you'll hate it or you'll just not get it.

Just because two different things (game/animated series) use a similar technique doesn't mean they are of the same quality. Ico also benefits from interactive storytelling, it being a game. Astartes also needs to be really good to deserve that comparison. This is not just about some people (dis-)liking some narrative technique.

Ico is a cult classic. Do you really think Astartes is comparable to that game besides some technicality?

Pointing out a cult classic that won awards by using the same story telling approuch the thing your dicussing did is indeed a fair response to criticism about the form of storytelling