<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/69.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
When gw had little to sell, Evocative words that powered the imagination is what they sold.

Everything felt bigger, more unknowable when it was from textual inference and ambiguity.

But as their product line expanded it put perceived boundaries on that scope. Now instead of unknown regiments it's all about known ones. And with official models they now have elevated importance beyond the unknown ones.

This is a kind of corporate flanderisation where the more they create things they need to sell, the less thing without tangible products disappear. Which over simplifies the world and reduces it's grandeur
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827173.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827173.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827181.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827181.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums It's too often we hear here and there "dey make 40k smaller", though I don't see any real changes.
Yeah we now have more named space marines. And there is 5 notable active warzones on map instead of 2. But what changed? GW written lore for 3 more planets. Of a million in imperium and billiards in galaxy.
You wanna own unique regiment? With rough riders on doggosaurus? Such conversions never this accessible with all those stl and a 3dprinters available on any bakery.
Nothing, and especially GW don't stop us from imagine anything in boundaries of galaxy. Yeah they push cadians, but it's because it's most known regiments.
It's more like we are becoming too lazy to imagine our unknown things.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827184.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827184.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums AoS lore right - a setting so bonkers open that it actually suffers lore/storywise from the fact that its so insanely vast and open? Where cities can be mounted top huge beasts; where other regions the land reshapes from valleys to mountains overnight and back again; whilst there's a whole realm where ALL the dead go and each religion has its own little corner of unique death including the Skaven (which means is teeming freaking huge).


The 40K and AoS settings are no less vast than they've ever been, Sure codex and official media focuses on the product - and guess what; it did that back in the 2010s and the 2000s and the 1990s. Even back in the "deodorant can tank" era the official media focused on the product.

I'm not even sure what you expect GW to do; produce vast amounts of artwork of factions that they will never produce as models? If they did that you'd be here complaining that GW has never made X legion of Imperial Guard despite constantly talking about them (heck some of us are still waiting to see a single Exodites model )




Also its 2026; we have 3D printers; firms have more ready access to casting methods like plastics than ever before. The market is FLOODED with alternative armies; takes; designs; ideas and potential.
Youtube is bursting at the seams with guides on how to do everything from the 3D design to greenstuff sculpting to terrain and more.

GW doesn't "HAVE" to do everything; they don't need too. There is VAST media out there to do other stuff if you spend 5 seconds looking for it. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827186.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827186.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
The problem with that is writers change things, add and remove things, whatever it takes to make that story interesting. They are not thinking about tabletop rules because they are not playing a game. They are telling a story.

GW looks at that and says, well the books are doing this, so we need to change the game to reflect that. No! Keep the stories (books) separate from the tabletop game rules. Get your basics down that will never change and adjust other rules as needed for balance and fun.

We don't need anymore "Throw everything out the window because we're changing everything."

*edit*
Forgot to add the disclaimer: "My $0.02"]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827188.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827188.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
To quantify the gaps between lore to be just valuable as the lore itself.

The way gw treats it sets the cultural standard for the community, so if they only care about primarchs and describing a set number of chapters and selling models for them, and only writing books to tie into their products, then the way the community interacts with the setting changes from active participation to passive consumption.

And conversation is only on people's favourite primarch or the 'lore accurate ' way to paint X or play y.

The concepts in between are where the greatest scope lie and where much of the game's depth is found, precisely because it doesn't end at the release of a product and it's supporting materials.

How do sell the intangible ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827204.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827204.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Hellebore wrote:

How do sell the intangible


It's call books.

Black Library has loads of books that detail subfactions, planets, worlds, units, tanks, aliens and so forth that never appear as models. Heck I forget but I'm reasonably sure that the Horus Heresy book series was a thing before the tabletop game got underway? At the very least the HH Book series became a major world seller to markets well outside of those who would ever touch a model on the tabletop.

GW develops loads of bits that never make it to tabletop - Cathay, Nippon, Exodites etc.. are all names of factions that have either never had models for decades or only just recently had some released. Yet they are factions and terms that people familiar with the lore know of.

The thing is GW doesn't want to spend months talking about Nippon in articles; conversions; books and so forth when its not a product they can sell. Because that's what customers will turn around and want/ask for. Indeed if GW pushes X then the potential market for X grows which means the potential for a product for X grows. Thing is from GW's point of view its al ot more efficient to grow interest in X alongside models for X which is why we don't see them push content for new factions until those factions are are going to be a reality.

Everything costs so why should GW spend money on something that won't make money back when they have the choice.




Honestly GW fleshes out their setting really well; most wargames (that are not historical) don't have anywhere near the depth that most GW games do. They have one manual; perhaps a lore book or a short website paragraph or three; They sketch it out ;but ultimately don't have all that much. A few games go way deeper, but even then they still focus on factions that they are releasing or want to release "soon" and which are thus on the horizon. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827216.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827216.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
It makes the universe feel smaller when, for example, every single battle appears to involve Chapter Master Magnificent Caviar.

I think it would be better if most (if not all) of the named characters in 40k were portrayed as being far more distant.

In fact, I'm reminded a little of the Planeswalkers in mtg. There was a particular story (Innistrad, IIRC), that really brought home how awful they are for the setting. There was a scene where various characters (all from the actual plane) were engaged in their respective machinations, and all of them felt well-characterised. And then a Plansewalker turns up with all the personality of a bowl of porridge and (for good measure) Mary Sue powers that easily beat the villain's powers because she's just that amazing.

I think it was the fastest I'd ever lost engagement with a story. And I tend to have similar feelings for many of 40k's named characters.

Anyway, the point I'm (laboriously) trying to make is that trying to include these larger-than-life figures can make the universe feel smaller (because, despite there being billions of worlds, somehow a handful of characters are involved with all of them). Moreover, it also tends to overshadow other, more interesting characters who have far more of a stake in the world. It can also just be tiresome when other characters lose all agency as they can't even blow their noses without it being all part of Vect's plan.


 Overread wrote:
You have read the AoS lore right - a setting so bonkers open that it actually suffers lore/storywise from the fact that its so insanely vast and open? Where cities can be mounted top huge beasts; where other regions the land reshapes from valleys to mountains overnight and back again; whilst there's a whole realm where ALL the dead go and each religion has its own little corner of unique death including the Skaven (which means is teeming freaking huge).


It's funny because AoS has almost the opposite problem.

Every time I hear it described, I remember why I have zero interest in any story that involves the 'Multiverse'. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827219.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827219.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums SM and SM2. All new is bad! Gimme ultramarine! And so on. GW won't create a content and miniatures they couldn't sell, the same with our starters every edition with sm + some hobo faction.

Plainwalkers really kill the lore of mtg they are even stupider then primarchs.
And again we see 5-7 battle zones. Not billions. It's obvious Catgar send his chapter to fight most glorious battles.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827222.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827222.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Pre-Chapterhouse, GW could describe things without any intention of putting them into production, so we got things like the 3rd edition two-page spread of Imperial Guard regiments and descriptions of things like Mycetic Spores with which to go off and let our imaginations run rampant, and so third parties popped up putting those described-but-not-produced concepts into production, or making their own versions of things to fill gaps in the market. GW had operated on the assumption that anything they put out into the ether was theres, immutably, irrevocably, and so they saw people making their own versions of things that were "theirs" and put their foot down.

Afterwards? The lawsuit violently disabused GW of that notion, they found out the limits of what their control actually was. You can't stop someone making and selling a physical model of something you've only ever described or put into artwork. You can't claim trademark over generic names and icons, you can't claim ownership of artwork where there's no contract giving you that right. Yes, they "won" on several counts, but they also lost on some significant ones, and third parties now had legal precedent saying what was and was not allowed, not just by GW's permission, but by actual law.

So GW pivoted hard, renamed factions, removed codex entries for almost everything that did not have a current model, and that affected the lore too. Regiments that were prominent in the background but had no available models took a back seat and things they could sell took priority. Almost all artwork they put out was of some tangible, sellable thing (although I'm still waiting for that tentacled nurgle beastie from the Dark Imperium art!).

It wasn't total, there were still some gaps - but it was a significant, notable shift.

Chapterhouse shifted GW's entire corporate ethos from just assuming they had automatic rights (even if they didn't choose to exercise them) over every concept they had ever published to operating within the strict - and public - lines set out by the ruling, so their worlds contracted around the main things they could monetize and moved away from things that just existed in the background but were not actual products that could be sold.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827226.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827226.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums GW are in a semi-unique position in the market too. Most other brands can make art, lore and concepts that might never reach the table because they are basically so small no one cares enough to design models and bring them to the consumer market.

Even with 3D printing that impact is tiny on other brands. For GW they can preview a model and within a day there's copies and 3rd party options out there; and demand for it.


AI is the next biggest hurdle that can impact everyone on that front; since if tokens remain insanely cheap there's potential for this kind of impact to hit any creative group. You can't preview art for the next Warmachine army if someone is going to get AI to spit out a thousand designs of models for them before you've even finished the preview showcase video. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827229.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827229.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Charax wrote:
I've said this before, but I believe it all comes back to the same thing: The Chapterhouse Lawsuit

Pre-Chapterhouse, GW could describe things without any intention of putting them into production, so we got things like the 3rd edition two-page spread of Imperial Guard regiments and descriptions of things like Mycetic Spores with which to go off and let our imaginations run rampant, and so third parties popped up putting those described-but-not-produced concepts into production, or making their own versions of things to fill gaps in the market. GW had operated on the assumption that anything they put out into the ether was theres, immutably, irrevocably, and so they saw people making their own versions of things that were "theirs" and put their foot down.

Afterwards? The lawsuit violently disabused GW of that notion, they found out the limits of what their control actually was. You can't stop someone making and selling a physical model of something you've only ever described or put into artwork. You can't claim trademark over generic names and icons, you can't claim ownership of artwork where there's no contract giving you that right. Yes, they "won" on several counts, but they also lost on some significant ones, and third parties now had legal precedent saying what was and was not allowed, not just by GW's permission, but by actual law.

So GW pivoted hard, renamed factions, removed codex entries for almost everything that did not have a current model, and that affected the lore too. Regiments that were prominent in the background but had no available models took a back seat and things they could sell took priority. Almost all artwork they put out was of some tangible, sellable thing (although I'm still waiting for that tentacled nurgle beastie from the Dark Imperium art!).

It wasn't total, there were still some gaps - but it was a significant, notable shift.

Chapterhouse shifted GW's entire corporate ethos from just assuming they had automatic rights (even if they didn't choose to exercise them) over every concept they had ever published to operating within the strict - and public - lines set out by the ruling, so their worlds contracted around the main things they could monetize and moved away from things that just existed in the background but were not actual products that could be sold.


Everything that comes from the Chapterhouse lawsuit suggests that no one in GW's entire boardroom has an IG above room temperature.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827233.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827233.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums GW under Kirby from under Rowntree. Kirby era GW was a fairly disconnected firm from its fans at the very top of the company.

To the point where we got famous lines in the shareholder meetings about them "not needing customer surveys" and the like. It's also when GW went totally nuts against the internet; trying to shut down any rumour sites; hardly running any web presence of their own ;shut down their own tournament event in the UK etc.... Right up until the AoS launch mess which basically broke the back of the old management team.

New GW is a very different beast and whilst it has some big changes; there are some elements from those Kirby days that still hang on (either in reality or in the minds of fans)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827254.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827254.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Hellebore wrote:
I would be interested to see how you sell the value of a lack of product to the company.

To quantify the gaps between lore to be just valuable as the lore itself.

The way gw treats it sets the cultural standard for the community, so if they only care about primarchs and describing a set number of chapters and selling models for them, and only writing books to tie into their products, then the way the community interacts with the setting changes from active participation to passive consumption.

And conversation is only on people's favourite primarch or the 'lore accurate ' way to paint X or play y.

The concepts in between are where the greatest scope lie and where much of the game's depth is found, precisely because it doesn't end at the release of a product and it's supporting materials.

How do sell the intangible


There wouldn't be any reason they couldn't add new models to the game, but to change the entire... everything... because "Oh they blew up the world in one of the books." is just beyond ridiculous. The largest complaint I see pretty much everywhere is about balance (right after cost, but that's just the nature of hobbies). I would think that would be their #1 concern and that starts with set rules, adjusted as balance issues are found. And there's your new rulebook to sell, v2.0x.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827261.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827261.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Even going back to the Rogue Trader rulebook? There are worlds named and cited. Arguably most famous, Birmingham. Not many, the merest figment of a sliver of a fragment of the near as dammit infinite worlds.

What there is now is a sort of reverse Star Wars. Outside of various homeworlds, we’ve seen ever more worlds named and famed. Necromunda, Angelus/Gorkamorka, Cadia, Armageddon, Vraks and so on and so forth. So it’s hardly rested on its laurels by only ever focussing on a handful of back water worlds.

There’s also, thanks to Internet and Black Library? Somewhat more of it than when we were necessarily restricted to monthly White Dwarfs, periodic Citadel Journals and occasional Codexes. Which can make it feel smaller again.

I’m going to recommend a course of Necromunda Background. We know more about that famed world than ever before, but it remains amazingly vague. Uncertain history, dynamic politicising among the Noble and Clan Houses and so on.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827267.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827267.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
To quote a reddit post:

The peak example is that the ultimate protagonist/hero of the Vraks campaign, a man who spoke to the Emperor and who led Grey Knights into battle on the nightmare skein of a burgeoning daemon world, was just some guy. He was a strong psyker, sure, but his name never gets a mention in the franchise's top fifty.

And the architect? The man whose whims drowned millions of screaming mouths in sucking mud, plague, caustic gas, and lasgun fire? Also just some guy. Who became a daemon prince of Nurgle, by the way.

Neither of those characters could be made in modern 40k because the franchise places no true narrative value on anyone who isn't a Space Marine or a Primarch. And while I enjoy both Space Marines and Primarchs, the setting is poorer when you don't have random-ass supermen like Hector Rex running around.

Hell, both Vraks and Badab also showcase that Space Marines don't have to be first- or second-founding chapters to matter, but stuff like that is a vanishing rarity nowadays.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827276.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827276.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
vipoid wrote:I think one of the issues has been the increasing focus on named characters.

It makes the universe feel smaller when, for example, every single battle appears to involve Chapter Master Magnificent Caviar.

I think it would be better if most (if not all) of the named characters in 40k were portrayed as being far more distant.

In fact, I'm reminded a little of the Planeswalkers in mtg. There was a particular story (Innistrad, IIRC), that really brought home how awful they are for the setting. There was a scene where various characters (all from the actual plane) were engaged in their respective machinations, and all of them felt well-characterised. And then a Plansewalker turns up with all the personality of a bowl of porridge and (for good measure) Mary Sue powers that easily beat the villain's powers because she's just that amazing.

I think it was the fastest I'd ever lost engagement with a story. And I tend to have similar feelings for many of 40k's named characters.

Anyway, the point I'm (laboriously) trying to make is that trying to include these larger-than-life figures can make the universe feel smaller (because, despite there being billions of worlds, somehow a handful of characters are involved with all of them). Moreover, it also tends to overshadow other, more interesting characters who have far more of a stake in the world. It can also just be tiresome when other characters lose all agency as they can't even blow their noses without it being all part of Vect's plan.


I agree, I think the focus on special characters is probably the single biggest trend that has led to the world feeling smaller. It also generates a different... feel to the game. If I wanted to play Warmachine, I would have played Warmachine rather than have 40k turned into a character-focused game.

Charax wrote:I've said this before, but I believe it all comes back to the same thing: The Chapterhouse Lawsuit

Pre-Chapterhouse, GW could describe things without any intention of putting them into production, so we got things like the 3rd edition two-page spread of Imperial Guard regiments and descriptions of things like Mycetic Spores with which to go off and let our imaginations run rampant, and so third parties popped up putting those described-but-not-produced concepts into production, or making their own versions of things to fill gaps in the market. GW had operated on the assumption that anything they put out into the ether was theres, immutably, irrevocably, and so they saw people making their own versions of things that were "theirs" and put their foot down.

Afterwards? The lawsuit violently disabused GW of that notion, they found out the limits of what their control actually was. You can't stop someone making and selling a physical model of something you've only ever described or put into artwork. You can't claim trademark over generic names and icons, you can't claim ownership of artwork where there's no contract giving you that right. Yes, they "won" on several counts, but they also lost on some significant ones, and third parties now had legal precedent saying what was and was not allowed, not just by GW's permission, but by actual law.

So GW pivoted hard, renamed factions, removed codex entries for almost everything that did not have a current model, and that affected the lore too. Regiments that were prominent in the background but had no available models took a back seat and things they could sell took priority. Almost all artwork they put out was of some tangible, sellable thing (although I'm still waiting for that tentacled nurgle beastie from the Dark Imperium art!).

It wasn't total, there were still some gaps - but it was a significant, notable shift.

Chapterhouse shifted GW's entire corporate ethos from just assuming they had automatic rights (even if they didn't choose to exercise them) over every concept they had ever published to operating within the strict - and public - lines set out by the ruling, so their worlds contracted around the main things they could monetize and moved away from things that just existed in the background but were not actual products that could be sold.

Eh... that isn't quite true, although it doesn't change the result.

What you say is correct for US law. The Chapterhouse case occurred in the US. GW is a UK company, and UK law is somewhat different on copyright. Probably, although this hasn't been tested in court, GW would have won the same case outright in the UK as the UK does not have the same framework around transforming content to escape copyright. I suspect that GW operated the way it did as a UK company, became successful enough to go international, and then eventually ran into an issue when it encountered the Chapterhouse case in a jurisdiction with subtly-different copyright law.

It still had the same effect of chilling GW depictions they had no models for of course, the US is a big market for GW and they were not going to pull out of it.

Overall, I do agree that Chapterhouse and the focus on named characters together have done the most to make the setting feel smaller than it actually is. The special character effect has also spread to naming conventions in codices, where some generic units are being replaced by named units like infantry squads being replaced with Death Korps, Cadian, and Catachan squads. The setting is presented as narrower.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827277.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827277.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Ashiraya wrote:
There's definitely been a bit of "prestige creep".

To quote a reddit post:

The peak example is that the ultimate protagonist/hero of the Vraks campaign, a man who spoke to the Emperor and who led Grey Knights into battle on the nightmare skein of a burgeoning daemon world, was just some guy. He was a strong psyker, sure, but his name never gets a mention in the franchise's top fifty.

And the architect? The man whose whims drowned millions of screaming mouths in sucking mud, plague, caustic gas, and lasgun fire? Also just some guy. Who became a daemon prince of Nurgle, by the way.

Neither of those characters could be made in modern 40k because the franchise places no true narrative value on anyone who isn't a Space Marine or a Primarch. And while I enjoy both Space Marines and Primarchs, the setting is poorer when you don't have random-ass supermen like Hector Rex running around.

Hell, both Vraks and Badab also showcase that Space Marines don't have to be first- or second-founding chapters to matter, but stuff like that is a vanishing rarity nowadays.

Man. I think this hit the nail on the head. I had not even realiced how few random dudes have come up in the last years.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827278.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827278.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827285.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827285.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Lord Damocles wrote:
I'm not sure that I'd agree with the 'no random dudes' angle - random dudes like Inquisitor LadyDragon, Commissar ArmouredCar, Inquisitor DonQuixote, Lord WorldSpearer, etc. spawn out of absolutely nowhere all the time, only to be almost immediately forgotten about again.


They come alongside model releases though.

Whilst the Vraks characters mentioned above did get characters, an awful lot of older narratives mentioned individuals key to the campaign that never got models, and often no art or rules too.

I don't think we'd get the likes of the Third War for Armageddon campaign placing significant prominence on characters without models like Helbrecht (yes, he got a model in the next edition of the game, but not during the campaign).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827289.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827289.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Like, dramatic as the drama was, it did have that point!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827291.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827291.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
 Hellebore wrote:

How do sell the intangible


It's call books.

Black Library has loads of books that detail subfactions, planets, worlds, units, tanks, aliens and so forth that never appear as models. Heck I forget but I'm reasonably sure that the Horus Heresy book series was a thing before the tabletop game got underway? At the very least the HH Book series became a major world seller to markets well outside of those who would ever touch a model on the tabletop.

GW develops loads of bits that never make it to tabletop - Cathay, Nippon, Exodites etc.. are all names of factions that have either never had models for decades or only just recently had some released. Yet they are factions and terms that people familiar with the lore know of.

The thing is GW doesn't want to spend months talking about Nippon in articles; conversions; books and so forth when its not a product they can sell. Because that's what customers will turn around and want/ask for. Indeed if GW pushes X then the potential market for X grows which means the potential for a product for X grows. Thing is from GW's point of view its al ot more efficient to grow interest in X alongside models for X which is why we don't see them push content for new factions until those factions are are going to be a reality.

Everything costs so why should GW spend money on something that won't make money back when they have the choice.




Honestly GW fleshes out their setting really well; most wargames (that are not historical) don't have anywhere near the depth that most GW games do. They have one manual; perhaps a lore book or a short website paragraph or three; They sketch it out ;but ultimately don't have all that much. A few games go way deeper, but even then they still focus on factions that they are releasing or want to release "soon" and which are thus on the horizon.


Their books were part of that evocative direction when they had no products.

Now it's very clear that books are considered supporting collateral for product lines and must be produced to sell them. Especially the space marine ones and especially the Horus heresy.

The samples you give are all from 40.years ago, as I said when they relied on the intangible.

They've been mining that stuff for the last decade rather than building a new evocative background

Without those bits the setting starts to thin because you've stretched everything to fit. 40k operated like a.massive battlscape painting with a huge amount of implied activity and only some in focus and painted in detail. They could generate a feeling of depth by making a selected faction just one face in focus in a crowd.

They've been colouring in some of those others but not repalcing them.

And the focus on special characters changes it from a battlscape to a series of portraits, instead of being a larger than life image of everything it's now a personal image of some of the people there.



]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827343.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827343.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
They feel somewhat under explored in the background.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827358.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827358.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
In terms of the background? I think it would be cool to spend some time on a Feral World.

They feel somewhat under explored in the background.


When i look at 40k there is a lot there, but things I’m really interested in go unexplored.
Maybe it’s why I like necromunda so much and even Mordheim I still find little things to read and my imagination goes wild. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827364.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827364.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
It's call books.

Black Library has loads of books that detail subfactions, planets, worlds, units, tanks, aliens and so forth that never appear as models. Heck I forget but I'm reasonably sure that the Horus Heresy book series was a thing before the tabletop game got underway? At the very least the HH Book series became a major world seller to markets well outside of those who would ever touch a model on the tabletop.


A lot of the modern books read like catalogs for the miniatures, though. The idea of this being a vast galaxy full of weird things that we only see a sliver of gets diminished a bit when you can practically see the '™' after every proper noun.

Some of the BL authors still preserve the sense of weirdness. I really like Peter Fehervari's books, where you get a lot of totally novel stuff like the Arkan Confederates (US Civil War themed Guard regiment), Steamblood Zouaves (bulky pseudo-battlesuits), or Exordio Void Breachers (zero-G specialists). When he portrays things that do come from the existing model range, they're presented as they would appear in-universe to someone who doesn't know their proper name.

Then I crack open the latest Astra Militarum codex and there's no two-page spread of sketches of various Guard regiments, there's no full page of theater-specific camo patterns for Cadian regiments (they always fight in parade dress now, apparently), the rules themselves are limited to the three regiments that GW produces in plastic, and nothing happens in the narrative without a named character (buy now, only $39.99) being involved.

The reduction in scope is noticeable. Not surprising, considering this is now an aggressively marketed flagship corporate product rather than just a hobby for nerds, but noticeable.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827394.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827394.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
(Skaventide isn't even a bad novel and actually dares to step out of its box sometimes, like with the chain-hook Skaven kidnappers, but even so it's also full of Units Now on Sale).]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827501.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827501.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Ashiraya wrote:
Yeah, for sure. Reading early 2000s Abnett novels like Eisenhorn is a radical culture shock compared to reading 2020s novels like Skaventide where, as you, say, the ™ is so looming it's present even in its absence.

(Skaventide isn't even a bad novel and actually dares to step out of its box sometimes, like with the chain-hook Skaven kidnappers, but even so it's also full of Units Now on Sale).


Maybe this is why the final Bequin book is almost as delayed as Winds of Winter ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827502.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827502.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums

Heck I recall when there were naga and sea seaserpents in Sylvaneth and a whole undersea world that they added to one of the novels as a short element. A concept that probably was somewhere in GW's background at the time when they were alla bout micro-armies and such; but which has never come to fruition in the game. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827506.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827506.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums LOS.

Ultimately, it's pretty rare people create truly memorable campaigns and settings and put in the effort to bring them to life in ways that stick with us, but the ability to do so has never been taken away. You just have to be willing to create your star system, build recognizable scenery, name your dudes and tell the stories you want to tell. It's really never been taken away. The codex pages people skip over are full of this kind of stuff. It's just easy to ignore when there are so many things vying for our attention at any given moment.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827507.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827507.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 LunarSol wrote:
Ultimately, it's pretty rare people create truly memorable campaigns and settings and put in the effort to bring them to life in ways that stick with us, but the ability to do so has never been taken away.


This is my view. Nothing is stopping you setting your story in some undescribed corner of the galaxy.
It would be nice if GW lore in either the codexes or main rule books could match the quality of the Imperial Armour books. But equally while these were labours of love, they were explicitly aimed at selling really expensive forgeworld kits.

I also think "flanderisation" is overused.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827510.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827510.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
It's a bit of an unfair comparison considering one is a stand alone novel and the other was a novel released right alongside a new launch edition of the game as a companion product. If anything putting things in Skaventide that are not in the box/game would be more of a mistake since the books sort of paired up super close too it.


Heck I recall when there were naga and sea seaserpents in Sylvaneth and a whole undersea world that they added to one of the novels as a short element. A concept that probably was somewhere in GW's background at the time when they were alla bout micro-armies and such; but which has never come to fruition in the game.


But that's the point, the novels have shifted from a product on their own, to supporting marketing collateral and thus occupy a completely different space. The difference you see as an unfair comparison is exactly the point. The unfairness isn't the comparison, it's that GW changed how the books work so that comparison is now so obvious.


GW won't let a stand alone novel with too much world building get produced anymore, unless it also has accompanying models to sell. Their novels used to be a product unto themselves, now they're just a long poster for a toy. You can see how this evolved with the HH novels. Their first few were speculative, world building. but then they produced models and a game and over the last 20 years the novels now connect more and more to the products.

Fiction driven sales vs product support driven sales have changed how they get novels written. For the worse in my opinion.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827517.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827517.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums AoS ones still have a tonne of stuff that isn't appearing as a model. Cities of Sigmar in the stories is full hard core steam punk - tabletop wise they really only have the CogFort. The rest is honestly almost pre-steampunk era (a lot of their guns are more primitive in design than even Empire guns from Old World).


This is an issue because if fans connect more with the books and come through that gateway into Warhammer but then can't find that steam punk army; or that naga based undersea army; or that Asia inspired army with dragon leaders - suddenly their hook is lost.
Plus fans who ARE in the setting already read those books and instantly go "Ohh so maybe GW will make X". Some of us are STILL waiting for Exodites which so far have not had a single model in 40K (perhaps barring one or two in the Rogue Trader days?); and from what I recall have had a couple of models (and a few concepts) in Epic and that's it.



So on one front GW creating fantasy outside of product creates hooks and temptations that people want and don't get.

At the same time I also love when the books do that because it does help deepen the setting. It does flesh out the world; create interests and so forth



I think its a no win on either front. IF GW make models of everything in books and only put in books what they make models of they lose some free imagination in the setting; but gain hooks that make people happy.

In a sense you kind of want separation; but its also impossible to actually have. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827518.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827518.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums AoS demonstrates the point though, because it's been at that pre-product state for ages relying on old WFB models to sell.

They were using the novels to help world build because they didn't already have one. But now they're shifting to that novel per faction schtick.

The expectation that if it's described it has to have models is also a relatively new phenomenon.

Back in the early days of Dakka and Portent we would discuss these snippets just for their own sake, obviously saying it would be great to see models but also just talking about the scale of snippets and extra stuff that's out there.

Exodites are a little different in that they actually had 40k stats and epic preproduction models. So they were closer to a model release than say the 'quiescent perils of the c'tan', the only mention of the c'tan until the callidus phase sword and then much later the 3rd ed codex necrons.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827519.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827519.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827520.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827520.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums GW products)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827552.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827552.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
It's a bit of an unfair comparison considering one is a stand alone novel and the other was a novel released right alongside a new launch edition of the game as a companion product. If anything putting things in Skaventide that are not in the box/game would be more of a mistake since the books sort of paired up super close too it.


Heck I recall when there were naga and sea seaserpents in Sylvaneth and a whole undersea world that they added to one of the novels as a short element. A concept that probably was somewhere in GW's background at the time when they were alla bout micro-armies and such; but which has never come to fruition in the game.

So the funny part about this is that Eisenhorn was also a tie-in product. It was written to tie in with the Inquisitor game release- Abnett was shown an early version of the game in development. You can see links like the discussion of the new Inquisitorial philosophies.

The fact it isn't obvious rather underlines the original point.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827554.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827554.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 tauist wrote:
I think its also about catering to less "creative" minds and shorter attention spans, the target audience of today. A Timmy from 1991 is a completely different Timmy than a Timmy from 2026. You gotta have stuff that you can buy straight away, and get cracking with, and you need to have a list for what colour to use etc. Introducing stuff that leaves your imagination to run wild wont be conductive to getting sales from such Timmys (or rather, their single moms who apparently are the biggest buyers of GW products)


Which is little different to how it was in the olden days.

Yes, the painting guides have gotten better. Yes, the advent of Contrast and a bit of slapchop has lowered the skill barrier to reasonably painted models.

But in the olden days? Painting Guides did exist, they just lacked detail. And if you had a GW Store nearby, they’d do you a free painting lesson on pretty much anything,

That support and easing the path in has always existed. It’s just done much better these days. And there’s still constant encouragement to hone your skills, be that modelling, playing, painting or what have you.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827555.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827555.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Haighus wrote:
So the funny part about this is that Eisenhorn was also a tie-in product. It was written to tie in with the Inquisitor game release- Abnett was shown an early version of the game in development. You can see links like the discussion of the new Inquisitorial philosophies.

The fact it isn't obvious rather underlines the original point.


I think without prompting most people probably forget (or never knew) Inquisitor ever existed.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827556.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827556.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Tyel wrote:
 Haighus wrote:
So the funny part about this is that Eisenhorn was also a tie-in product. It was written to tie in with the Inquisitor game release- Abnett was shown an early version of the game in development. You can see links like the discussion of the new Inquisitorial philosophies.

The fact it isn't obvious rather underlines the original point.


I think without prompting most people probably forget (or never knew) Inquisitor ever existed.


Yeah you don't even see models if it appear all that often anywhere and that scale of gaming has ever strongly taken off. Heck I'd argue that Confrontation Last Argument of Kings is probably the biggest larger-scale game and that's only at 40mm and even that stands out a lot in the market. Even bigger scale models are typically in the art/painting/collection bracket. I have seen a few games at conventions over the last few years trying to kick off games in those scales; the models always look very cool but to me its somewhat telling that every time I see one of those booths they only have models on display.

There's no terrain, table, game on show; just big models and potential for a game. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827559.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827559.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums GW’s target commercial audience. GW’s target audience has not experienced the kind of storytelling you’re talking about, has different expectations, discovered Warhammer 40K through meme culture, which has amplified the caricature-like aspects at the expense of "grandeur", and is used to getting answers to mysteries.

Nothing new under the sun.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827560.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827560.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
Yeah you don't even see models if it appear all that often anywhere and that scale of gaming has ever strongly taken off. Heck I'd argue that Confrontation Last Argument of Kings is probably the biggest larger-scale game and that's only at 40mm and even that stands out a lot in the market. Even bigger scale models are typically in the art/painting/collection bracket. I have seen a few games at conventions over the last few years trying to kick off games in those scales; the models always look very cool but to me its somewhat telling that every time I see one of those booths they only have models on display.


I'd imagine the need to (at least in theory) build terrain to fit the 54mm scale was something of a burden.
But IIRC the main problem with Inquisitor is that it was exactly the sort of game GW have wanted to make but there's seemingly not much of an audience for.
I.E. There was no points. You are meant to just try and invent a fair scenario - and keep it fair by playing for narrative/RPG results rather than just killing the other player. The moment you approached it as a competitive game where you were aiming to win it fell over.

This all added up to it being more fun to read the Inquisitor battle reports/scenarios in the Inferno! magazine than it was to actually play.
After it was released in 2001 I think GW put a reasonable amount of effort marketing/selling the game for about 18-24 months. Then it went onto life support and after about 2005 it had functionally ceased to exist.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827563.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827563.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums 40k is now, with necro terrain and similar doing a lot of work.

Honestly though why you would want to play that and not confrontation from white dwarf is beyond me ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827565.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827565.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Selfcontrol wrote:
You are old. You are no longer GW’s target commercial audience. GW’s target audience has not experienced the kind of storytelling you’re talking about, has different expectations, discovered Warhammer 40K through meme culture, which has amplified the caricature-like aspects at the expense of "grandeur", and is used to getting answers to mysteries.

Nothing new under the sun.


This is the sad truth. I'm probably going to stop "following" the background soon because it doesn't make me happy to do so any more. But it's fine anyway, there's enough great stuff in the older background that I'll never run out, and in any case I'd rather be making up my own stuff than taking what's given to me by GW (or WOTC, or whoever else).

I do miss the mystery of the older days, but you just can't recreate that in the modern world. All we had were whatever books we could get locally, and there was no way to find anything else out without word of mouth. So we could have these long discussions over the implications of a little bit of boxed text in a 40K rulebook because we couldn't find "the answer" quickly. I found the same thing with comic books back then - we would buy boxes of old american comics second hand, and the collections would have gaps in them and so on. And there'd be these little boxes saying "See Aquaman issue 98" or whatever, and we didn't have that or any way to get it, so we'd have to speculate about what might have happened. Or when there was a few issue gap in our collection, we'd have to discuss what we thought happened. Those are my fondest memories of being into comics as a kid. And you were so excited to get a new rulebook or find a comic you hadn't read.

Nowadays, if you want that information and it exists, it's trivially easy to find it. And you don't even have to find it yourself - there'll be someone on youtube who does that for you, and summarizes it for you and then tells you all about it so you don't even have to read anything yourself. It's turned all of these nerdy niches into something else entirely for me. And I think a lot of my fellow nerds get a sense of satisfaction and comfort from obsessively cataloguing every detail and making sure it's all correct, so it's all up on a wiki somewhere and people are very quick to come in and correct any discussion of possibilities with the "right answer" if it exists. So even discussions have a very different character nowadays with people mostly coming in looking for sources, quotes, screenshots and to either be told or to tell others what is true and correct rather than to speculate. I find speculation a lot more fun and creative, so discussion the background is just a bit depressing for me now.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827575.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827575.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
This is the sad truth. I'm probably going to stop "following" the background soon because it doesn't make me happy to do so any more.


This generational difference is also reflected in the way GW approaches its universe. We have moved from a fixed universe in which past stories are told (where a bit of mystery can be kept since they happened a long time ago), to a living, evolving story and universe in motion (which needs explanations). The style of narration has therefore changed completely, but from what I see of mainstream popular culture, it seems to align with the expectations of newer generations (until the next generational shift).

Like you, I don’t really connect with this type of storytelling (for 40K anyway), and I largely stopped following the lore after the end of 8th. And it's fine. I still have lots of fond memories from the past and I don't mind aging. It's just life.

My only criticism of GW is its decision to connect almost everything in 40K to the Horus Heresy. The final straw for me was the role attributed to the Pharos in the Tyranids arrival. It's downright moronic.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827615.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827615.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Shifting it to the Pharos being the trigger and then the Astronomican being a continual lighthouse lure isn't really changing the lore all that much since its all set in the 30K era. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827620.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827620.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums 40K lore has been gotten worse for a long time, but bringing back the loyalist primarchs was a step too far for me. It just ruined the setting. So these day I try not pay much attention to the official lore any more, as the headcanon is the only way I can keep enjoying the setting. ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827624.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827624.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
But the Astronomican drawing the Tyranids to the Milky Way has been in the lore for decades. At least as one of the potential story hooks (others mostly are "drifting tyranids roaming and aimlessly wandering into the galaxy; or fleeing from some even greater threat, though that last one is more fan/throwaway comment theory).

Shifting it to the Pharos being the trigger and then the Astronomican being a continual lighthouse lure isn't really changing the lore all that much since its all set in the 30K era.


It's not a retcon per se, but it's another instance of something which stands perfectly well on its own becoming yet another consequence of the Horus Heresy. Which if you're already not a fan of how the forgotten time of myth and legend has been wrung dry in excruciating detail, just magnifies the annoyance.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827625.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827625.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Selfcontrol wrote:
This is the sad truth. I'm probably going to stop "following" the background soon because it doesn't make me happy to do so any more.


This generational difference is also reflected in the way GW approaches its universe. We have moved from a fixed universe in which past stories are told (where a bit of mystery can be kept since they happened a long time ago), to a living, evolving story and universe in motion (which needs explanations). The style of narration has therefore changed completely, but from what I see of mainstream popular culture, it seems to align with the expectations of newer generations (until the next generational shift).

Like you, I don’t really connect with this type of storytelling (for 40K anyway), and I largely stopped following the lore after the end of 8th. And it's fine. I still have lots of fond memories from the past and I don't mind aging. It's just life.

My only criticism of GW is its decision to connect almost everything in 40K to the Horus Heresy. The final straw for me was the role attributed to the Pharos in the Tyranids arrival. It's downright moronic.


Ironically, this is why I increasingly favour Horus Heresy instead.

Because it's set in a fixed time span, GW can explore it sideways and depthways, but can't really extend it. They can move into the Scouring if they want (though they might not, apparently Ashes of Imperium didn't sell to expectations), but 005.M31 was when the Heresy started and 014.M31 was when it ended, and that is set in stone unless GW wants to go very bold with the retcons!]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827628.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827628.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
I'm a little numb to these things being a comic book fan. The reality is that fiction is really only impactful in relation to the time it was written. A lot of 40k's impact was how it recognized the darkness in more optimistic times. The appeal isn't quite the same as it was a few decades ago, particularly for generations less familiar with the 80s.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827631.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827631.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
But it certainly is about aging out of the fandom for me. I think it's better to just leave it to people who enjoy it without rancor. There's some cool people here on Dakka who like the current background and it's no fun getting annoyed at their takes when they're nice and it's so inconsequential, but I really do get upset about it which is dumb.

That said, I'm not going to stop being interested in the fictional universe and the stuff I have. I hope to be playing games and painting stuff for years yet. But the era when I bought Black Library books regularly, always bought the new edition or was excited to read new codices when they came out is gone. I've also deflated on watching "Lore" videos on youtube, even from channels I previously enjoyed like Arbitor Ian.

I reckon it's all normal stuff, but hey, this is a discussion forum so worth talking about for the sake of it.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827632.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827632.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
Tyel wrote:
 Haighus wrote:
So the funny part about this is that Eisenhorn was also a tie-in product. It was written to tie in with the Inquisitor game release- Abnett was shown an early version of the game in development. You can see links like the discussion of the new Inquisitorial philosophies.

The fact it isn't obvious rather underlines the original point.


I think without prompting most people probably forget (or never knew) Inquisitor ever existed.


Yeah you don't even see models if it appear all that often anywhere and that scale of gaming has ever strongly taken off. Heck I'd argue that Confrontation Last Argument of Kings is probably the biggest larger-scale game and that's only at 40mm and even that stands out a lot in the market. Even bigger scale models are typically in the art/painting/collection bracket. I have seen a few games at conventions over the last few years trying to kick off games in those scales; the models always look very cool but to me its somewhat telling that every time I see one of those booths they only have models on display.

There's no terrain, table, game on show; just big models and potential for a game.

I don't think that is particularly relevant here. How many people will remember the Skaventide starter boxset in 20+ years? There will probably be a dozen plus new starters by then. How many people who even played 40k around the time of Inquisitor launching remember the 3rd edition starter boxset name today?

The point is that Eisenhorn didn't feel like a product box blurb stretched into a book, but it was a tie-in product.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827634.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827634.page GMT active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 Overread wrote:
But the Astronomican drawing the Tyranids to the Milky Way has been in the lore for decades. At least as one of the potential story hooks (others mostly are "drifting tyranids roaming and aimlessly wandering into the galaxy; or fleeing from some even greater threat, though that last one is more fan/throwaway comment theory).

Shifting it to the Pharos being the trigger and then the Astronomican being a continual lighthouse lure isn't really changing the lore all that much since its all set in the 30K era.


What you're saying isn't true. The theory (which was only speculation put forward by Imperial scholars) was that the Astronomican was drawing the Tyranid hive fleets already present in the galaxy specifically toward Terra. The origin of the Tyranid invasion was completely unknown, with other Imperial scholars proposing various speculative theories, ranging from the Tyranids fleeing from an even more dangerous enemy to the possibility that this is simply what the Tyranids have been doing since time immemorial.

In short, there was no definitive answer regarding the Tyranids origin. That fit both the grimdark nature of 40K and its sense of mystery, while also showing that the Horus Heresy was not the alpha and omega of everything that had happened. The Tyranid invasion was an independent event that stood perfectly well on its own, as catbarf said.

What I particularly appreciated about this old approach to the lore (both mysterious and centered on a largely static setting) is that it allowed for the creation of many compelling stories that are very different from one another (because they either happened a long time ago or were so small in the face of a whole galaxy that they didn't matter in the grand scheme of things), while also stimulating the reader's imagination. That's why I loved reading the old Forge World books such as The Anphelion Project, as well as the Dark Heresy books (despite never having played a single game of Dark Heresy myself !).

Not everything needs an explanation, not everything needs to make an impact on the larger setting. I always loved self-contained stories. And also, some of the most fascinating aspects of 40K were always, to me, the unanswered questions. Leaving room for mystery makes the universe feel larger, older, and more believable, because it suggests that neither the characters nor the audience can ever fully grasp everything that exists within it.

Self Control: Again, really agree. As catbarf says, it's the drive to link EVERYTHING to the Horus Heresy that turns me off - like making Armageddon into Ullanor, just awful, terrible background. I can't believe they actually did that.


I do not thank you for reminding me Armageddon terrible canonical background. Holy gak ]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827649.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827649.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
Selfcontrol wrote:
You are old. You are no longer GW’s target commercial audience. GW’s target audience has not experienced the kind of storytelling you’re talking about, has different expectations, discovered Warhammer 40K through meme culture, which has amplified the caricature-like aspects at the expense of "grandeur", and is used to getting answers to mysteries.

Nothing new under the sun.


It's a bit of a chicken or an egg thing, is it the expectation of generations, or the push from marketing that creates the expectation. I lean toward the latter.

Just as various trends come and go , I expect 'mystery' to come into vogue again as a response to immediate consumerism. People want what they don't have, and ironically not having access to a product that sells you something you can't have is itself a want.

I'm not trying to create a generational argument, as I find those highly constructed to create drama.

From a purely commercial perspective, there is value in just not answering your customers immediately. The corporate zeitgeist seems to think you'll lose your consumers if you don't pander to them endlessly, being reactive and ensuring they get everything. But that's the junkfood of fictional immersion. It's satisfying in the immediate, but leaves you hungry. The answer is to generate more junk to eat, but they won't be able to keep up with the consumer. Mystery and inference sustain people on literally nothing (or you wouldn't have conspiracy theories surviving this long).

But to make the mystery effective you need a product apparatus that supports and encourages engaging with the mystery. The 'your dudes' approach is one of the main ways this was sustained. GW turning from a hobby to consumerism, where you aren't encouraged to COUNTS AS or convert or explore the niche parts, further concentrates the passivity of the consumer and changes the dynamic.

If you only set up a community to buy things when they come out, only accept official things and slave themselves to 'lore accuracy', you will control and measure your sales. but you will always be in a position of never being able to satisfy the consumer, because there are an infinity of bad ideas and you will fast rely on those if your output must remain high.

The value of mystery is that it allows the consumer to place their own idea into the product, actively, which self selects for an idea that is good to them, keeping their interest. It also means 10 people in a room can all explore that same mystery in 10 different ways, all equally valid, and all meaningfully valuable to them. You aren't relying on one creative to construct a concept that will appeal to all customers.

This is where the 'it is said', or 'perhaps it works this way' approach of old 40k allowed multiple competing ideas about a single concept, like Tau Ethereals to exist and then every consumer can pick the one they like and dive into that. Answering questions will satisfy some, but alienate others and GW used to only do it sparingly. HH was where they broke that seal, when they actually novelised legendary figures who were originally shrouded in mystery and the mystery sustained the interest. But as soon as GW takes sides on what really happened, it draws lines between customers.

there's nothing wrong with taking up a passive consumption hobby, we all watch tv and that's about as passive as you get. GW just happen to sell product that allows them to tap into a really powerful and evocative form of storytelling and attention keeping that tv can't do. And instead, they've decided that they'll just do TV.


The other thing about revealing mysteries, is that unlike a tv show or a book series, 40k doesn't have an end. When you read a book, you discover the mysteries and get to the end and wrap it up. In 40k, revealing that ethereals do or dont' mind control, or that the tyranids are drawn to the emperor, or that the emperor is actually dead, or that isha is trapped in nurgle's garden, is just a data point added to the game. Tomorrow you still immerse yourself in it, but now the mystery is gone and you have a data point to add to your endless other data points about uniforms or troop numbers.

40k interacts with mystery in a fundamentally different way to other media, a powerfully evocative way, and rather than leverage that they've gone the modern corporate safe route of just reacting to consumers endlessly pouring junkfood down their throats and watching as it gets thinner and thinner and hoping the next wave of consumers will last just as long.


The 'this generation only likes x' is a disservice to all generations. We live in a highly controlled and measured media environment that creates needs and forces usage. The number of younger people looking for analogue hobbies has exploded as has the number leaving social media in direct reaction to the environment they've been forced into. It's a mistake to think that it's just 'kids these days not appreciating the mysteries of yore'.

It's no different to boomers blaming millennials for the participation trophies the boomers invented and gave to them.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827677.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827677.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
It's funny, as I've listened through Gaunts Ghosts it actually slightly annoys me how often we DON'T get to see stuff from the tabletop game. There's heaps of non-tapletop vehicle and weapons, which is really great and much better than wall to wall "Then a Leman Russ Battle Tank™️appeared in the Ruined Imperial Sector ™️and Gaunt drew his Power Sword™️" type stuff , but I don't think there's been a single scene with a guard Sentinel or infantry plasma gun in 12 novels! At least not to a level where it illustrates the interesting aspects of sci-fi tech on the battlefield. In fact one of them (showing the age of the novel and where the incidental fluff was at the time no doubt) has an infantryman destroy a Chaos dreadnought with an overloaded lasgun pack, which is pretty absurd in terms of energy density levels (and narrative power levels besides)]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827681.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827681.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
When I got all excited about an Adeptus Mechanicus army, I went out and picked up what ebooks I could find. The books in the Forge of Mars trilogy by Graham McNeil were released in 2012, 2013, and 2014 - before there was a miniature range - and I honestly thought that they were just bad. The hoplite-esque and now unrecognizable Skitarii were okay, but the story itself was disjointed with an over-reliance on The Chosen One and Space Tech-Magic! The whole thing was pretty forgettable except for, maybe, the lives of the thralls who were press ganged into service on the ship.

I then read Skitarius and Tech-Priest by Rob Sanders, and I really enjoyed those. The story made sense, people's motivations and machinations were believable, and stuff was grimdark in a "Our hubris unleashed Chaos!" way without going overboard into being flippant with "Our cyber-ghost fight casually destroyed uncountable amounts of irreplaceable data that nobody could even read!" I just learned as I looked up the publication dates for this post that those books were released in 2015 as the tie-in novels for the new Adeptus Mechanicus minis, but I would argue that the writing in the tie-in novels is just better than the writing in the other novels. That some of characters were recognizable as miniatures was neat as it showed another side to these silly little plastic toys, but it didn't seem to restrain the story at all.

Another thing is that this stuff only bothers you if you let it.

After Leagues of Votann came out, I picked up The High Kahl's Oath by Gav Thorpe, and that was a mixed bag. I thought some of the additional lore was cool, but the quality of the writing was spotty and it seemed to have suffered from an overly aggressive editor. Again, the best part was getting glimpses into the lives of these little grey men on my painting desk. So I'm keeping the bits that I like and dropping the bits that I don't like because these particular space dwarves are my space dwarves and I can do what I want with them.

I don't think that's gone away. I like the Mars colors, but that didn't stop me from giving my army its own story. Nobody is going to stop me from painting my Leagues of Votann army purple; that has actually gotten easier now that I can use whichever detachment with whichever paint job instead of having prescribed paint jobs for certain mechanics like in 9e. Just this weekend, I was ambushed by the idea for a Dark Angels successor chapter because what I really need in my life is yet another unfinished project fighting for limited spare time.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827688.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827688.page GMT Re:active vs passive consumerism and the flanderisation of infinite imaginariums
 RustyNumber wrote:
principalskinneramioutoftouch.jpeg goes here

It's funny, as I've listened through Gaunts Ghosts it actually slightly annoys me how often we DON'T get to see stuff from the tabletop game. There's heaps of non-tapletop vehicle and weapons, which is really great and much better than wall to wall "Then a Leman Russ Battle Tank™️appeared in the Ruined Imperial Sector ™️and Gaunt drew his Power Sword™️" type stuff , but I don't think there's been a single scene with a guard Sentinel or infantry plasma gun in 12 novels! At least not to a level where it illustrates the interesting aspects of sci-fi tech on the battlefield. In fact one of them (showing the age of the novel and where the incidental fluff was at the time no doubt) has an infantryman destroy a Chaos dreadnought with an overloaded lasgun pack, which is pretty absurd in terms of energy density levels (and narrative power levels besides)


I would say that's just classic protagonist power. Protagonists do all sorts of things that the average unnamed person can't. It's pretty tame compared to what Malum Caedo did.... Krak grenades were at the time capable of one shotting a dreadnought in melee. It's really interesting to plot gamist elements through GW's novels over the years. It isn't unreasonable that a laspack set to discharge all at once would generate at least the same damage as a krak grenade. the pack usually has 120-150 shots in it and while they wouldn't stack linearly, a S3 shot only needed to be S6 to kill a dreadnought at the time (or S4 if you were able to hit its rear). Dividing 120 by 3 gives 0.025, or about 0.08% of a shot per shot released at once. Should be pretty doable.


Your expectations for what you wanted in the story are also really telling. Because someone else might listen to it and say there's no way there'd be plasma guns in these units, they're rare. And given Abnett went with a particular tech base for the ghosts, IMO it was thematically appropriate they didn't have other equipment. GW goes to great lengths to show that all regiments are armed and armoured differently depending on their homeworld and what allied forgeworlds they may or may not have.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827689.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/819136/11827689.page GMT