News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: White Dwarf June 2017  (Read 2016 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alienscar

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1465
  • Country: 00
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
White Dwarf June 2017
« on: July 7, 2017, 09:50:24 AM »
White Dwarf June 2017



TL:DR You will like this issue if you like reading about Primaris Marines and looking at pictures of models.

I will give this issue 1.8 out of 5.

As everyone is aware a new edition of 40k has been released and this issue is where you can learn all about it.

I think I should point out that since White Dwarf was relaunched in Sept of 2016 this issue is only the second time that 40k has been given more than ten pages of detailed coverage.

Personally I feel a bit underwhelmed by the whole experience. In my opinion this issue comes across as a way of hyping the Primaris rather than an introduction to the new edition of 40k.
 
One page of meet the team, one editorial page, two contents pages, eleven pages of adverts and thirteen pages of stuff that you can buy or pre-order now. That is 17% of the mag.

The magazine is split into seventeen sections and they are:-
Latest News, Contact, Cover Feature: There Is Only War (New game, new background & new miniatures for 40k), Cover Feature: First Blood: Warhammer 40,000 (Members of White Dwarf play their first 8 edition games aided by the designers) , Cover Feature:Armies of the Dark Millennium (4 players work out army lists), Battle Report (Defence of Konor), Golden Demon (The Horus Heresy), A Tale of Four Warlords, Legion of the Realms (AoS army showcase), Ultimate Guide (Blades of Khorn), Imagists and Illuminators (Interview with the art team), Illuminations (the art team choose their favourite pieces), Army of the Month (Harlequin army by Harvey Snape), Paint Splatter (how to paint the Dark Millennium models), Temporal Distort (1997, issue 207), Readers’ Models, In the Bunker.

Including the adverts (but not the latest releases or Paint Splatter) and counting two half pages of pictures as one this issue has 64 pages that are nothing but pictures/photographs. That’s just shy of 40%.

For me that 40% figure is what spoiled what should have been a really good issue.

A good example of this is the “There is Only War” article. Ostensibly an article about the new edition this twenty four page article has eight pages worth of material that is nothing but pictures be that art work or photo’s of models. It also includes four pages of an Eavy Metal article on how to paint the Primaris in the colours of the four most popular (sic) Chapters.

I liked the little bit of background info,  the Datasheet guide and the Mark  X armour and Death Guard vector (4 pages) explanations but  think more space should have been given to the rule changes and background instead of just filling the space with pictures.

I can’t say for why but I like the First Blood articles you really get a feeling that you are learning something. It is quite a simple article but the way it is written you really makes you feel like you are watching as people play and learn a game for the first time.

I liked (tolerated) the article on the Armies of the Dark Millennium. This is eight pages detailing how four players picked their 8th Edition armies from their existing collections. Thousand Sons, Tau, Blood Angels and Tyranids were the armies in question. As ever the article was watered down because even though each player had two pages one page (or more in the case of the Blood Angels and Tyranids) was taken up with photo’s of the models.

The Battle Report like most of the previous Battle Report leaves me wanting something different. As I read this Battle Report I came to realise that it is not just the narrative nature of the Report that is making me dislike them it is the overall layout. Each turn of the Battle Report is displayed on two adjacent pages but there is more than a page worth of pictures included for each turn. I think that what I discovered is that I dislike the lack of detail and at the same time I dislike the amount of detail they are trying to cram into the limited space.
 
That probably doesn’t make a lot of sense so for example at the start of the Report they show the armies deployed on the board and they pick out some of the most important units. So that is good detail but it is let down by its execution. This is because the accompanying picture is too small to show the detail that they are trying to point out. That is, they point out where Guillman and the Devastators are on the map but they are all but indistinguishable. This makes me realise that they might as well go back to the old style of map that had icons for each unit.

Other detail that I like is that each turn includes little bits of tactical information but once again the layout of each turn makes this hard to assimilate. There is a quarter page of narrative writing about the turn and then various little boxed out areas of information surrounding a photo of the board that takes nearly 50% of the two allocated pages. I suppose what I am complaining about is that the layout just isn’t linear enough for my tastes.

A Tale of Four Warlords is once again just information on how the Warlords painted their latest army additions. This month was Fast Attack.

If you like this sort of thing there is an interview with the Design Studio’s art team but this in then followed by eight pages of art pieces chosen by the art team. The fact that the eight pages of the interview is essentially four pages of artwork then the whole article comes across as just nothing but pictures.

The Ultimate Guide to Blades of Khorne was a really good read and I don’t think that it is a coincidence that I end up liking a article where the words and pictures are balanced.

Like last month’s Readers’ Models the article was let down by the quality of the pictures. They lack the clarity and crispness of the in-house photo’s.

From page 84 onward you have Golden Demon, Four Warlords, Army Showcase, Illuminations, another army showcase, Paint Splatter, Readers’ Models and In the Bunker. This is fifty seven pages of how to paint and photographs of models.
« Last Edit: July 7, 2017, 09:51:27 AM by Alienscar »
Quote from: Starrakatt
"Russ, get your work done or you won't see your damn console for the next month!"
Quote from: Cavalier
Honestly Alienscar, we get it... you dont like painting!

Offline Lord of Winter and War

  • The Cause of Diabetes -Captain- Necrontyr Immortal - KoN Veteran - Master of All Diplomacy | Wi-Fi Nomad |
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8901
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Harlequins, Spiderfang, Bonereapers, Space Wolves
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #1 on: July 7, 2017, 10:01:31 AM »
Wow, a negative review. What a surprise.
Harlequin Army Blog

That's not blatant, this is blatant: I'm super happy that I'm playing Austria, the greatest nation in all of Diplomacy!

Azore of Austria

Offline Alienscar

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1465
  • Country: 00
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #2 on: July 7, 2017, 10:14:01 AM »
I am glad I managed to surprise you at least you got something good out of it. It is just my opinion so not so much a negative review just contrary to your opinion. I honestly thought I was fairly positive.
Quote from: Starrakatt
"Russ, get your work done or you won't see your damn console for the next month!"
Quote from: Cavalier
Honestly Alienscar, we get it... you dont like painting!

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #3 on: July 7, 2017, 10:17:54 AM »
Killersquid: in view of the fact that you're so keen on constructive and positive posting, why not offer a more substantial critique or your own evaluation of the magazine, rather than just posting a negative one line response?



The focus on Primaris Marines isn't surprising and fits with the drive to market Space Marines whenever there is a new release, so I understand why GW has done that and I'm more forgiving of that than you appear to be.  The issue about the lack of detail of the new game in relation to that point, however, is disappointing, but not surprising.  It reflects a trend present in White Dwarf for many years now.  I do wish that they would go back to the old turn-by-turn map system for battle reports with turn-by-turn reporting.  If they did that, I would definitely be persuaded to buy the magazine again.

I do think that the current guise of White Dwarf is an improvement on that which preceded it, but the superficiality of a lot of the articles is a concern for me.  I like depth, but that seems to be out of fashion these days.

Thanks for the review Alienscar :).
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #4 on: July 7, 2017, 10:26:50 AM »
G'day Alienscar!
Thanks for the effort, mate. As always was a hoot to read. I think the reason that there is sooo many photos for filler is that they are cheaper than writers. Have more articles and less photos means overpriced magazine. Just a guess though.

Am genuinely interested to know, Al. Which do you enjoy more? Reading WD or critiquing it? I ask because it doesn't matter whether you approve or not of an issue, there's always a lot of feeling in your writing. Please keep it up... Be well! 

Offline Lorizael

  • GW Shill: Infinity Circuit: Synergistic Spotter of Numpties
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6784
  • Country: 00
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #5 on: July 8, 2017, 08:24:05 PM »
G'day Alienscar!
Thanks for the effort, mate. As always was a hoot to read. I think the reason that there is sooo many photos for filler is that they are cheaper than writers. Have more articles and less photos means overpriced magazine. Just a guess though.

Photos aren't filler. This is a very visual hobby, all about miniatures. Pictures should always outnumber written pages in White Dwarf, it would be odd otherwise.

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #6 on: July 8, 2017, 08:49:05 PM »
G'day Lorizael!
I agree with you on photos being necessary. However, there are photos for illustration and then there's an over abundance of them to use as filler. Don't quote me on this, but I think this is what Al was getting at... I think.

Plus, having a marketing background, I know this sort of thing does happen. Whether WD does or not...?

Thanks for the reply! 

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #7 on: July 9, 2017, 05:31:51 AM »
Photos aren't filler. This is a very visual hobby, all about miniatures. Pictures should always outnumber written pages in White Dwarf, it would be odd otherwise.

Going back to much older editions of White Dwarf, this wasn't the case and it wasn't odd, so I think that this perspective depends largely on the era of White Dwarf that that someone grows up with.  I'd argue that White Dwarf should be dedicated more towards written articles with smaller photos, while the miniature showcasing in the way in which they tend to do it now is more suited to a miniatures catalogue.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Lorizael

  • GW Shill: Infinity Circuit: Synergistic Spotter of Numpties
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6784
  • Country: 00
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #8 on: July 9, 2017, 02:05:07 PM »
G'day Lorizael!
I agree with you on photos being necessary. However, there are photos for illustration and then there's an over abundance of them to use as filler. Don't quote me on this, but I think this is what Al was getting at... I think.

Plus, having a marketing background, I know this sort of thing does happen. Whether WD does or not...?

Thanks for the reply!

Thing is, the WD team is always requesting and after more pictures. If they were just filler every month, why not just make a smaller magazine? It's been much smaller before, and losing 10 pages a month wouldn't be a big deal if that was all just 'filler'. It's an active choice to show lots of visual inspiration, just like the Visions magazine.

Going back to much older editions of White Dwarf, this wasn't the case and it wasn't odd, so I think that this perspective depends largely on the era of White Dwarf that that someone grows up with.  I'd argue that White Dwarf should be dedicated more towards written articles with smaller photos, while the miniature showcasing in the way in which they tend to do it now is more suited to a miniatures catalogue.

We're of a similar age no? (36..) We grew up with early 90's WD? There are many things that I prefer nowadays in WD. But then I don't suffer from the debilitating condition of nostalgia.
Oddly, 20+ years ago, WD was an actual miniatures catalogue- it had dedicated catalogue pages in the back ;)

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #9 on: July 9, 2017, 02:35:30 PM »
Check my profile if you want to see my age.

My view is that White Dwarf used to be better.  The articles had more depth, the battle reports were written to a much higher standard, and the maps were much clearer.  This is why the content was superior.  The back pages back then were the mail order pages.  As a result, there was less of a need to advertise the models so frequently throughout the rest of the magazine.

The quality of the magazine in terms of the pages and presentation has, of course, improved with technology.  I also have no issue with the change in how models are advertised in the magazine.  This highlights that it is not a question of nostalgia, for if it were, I would argue that everything was better in the 1990s, and it wasn't.  However, the content simply is not well written enough for me and I would like to see it improved.  It's also not necessary to back to the 1990s to write good quality battle reports, they used to still produce those in the earlier years of the 2000s too.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Looshkin

  • Aspect Warrior
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
  • Country: gb
  • Once held an Utter Fear of Tiny Diamonds
  • Armies: I 'play' Eldar. Or at least horde unpainted models
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #10 on: July 9, 2017, 03:26:27 PM »
Check my profile if you want to see my age.

My view is that White Dwarf used to be better.  The articles had more depth, the battle reports were written to a much higher standard, and the maps were much clearer.  This is why the content was superior.  The back pages back then were the mail order pages.  As a result, there was less of a need to advertise the models so frequently throughout the rest of the magazine.

The quality of the magazine in terms of the pages and presentation has, of course, improved with technology.  I also have no issue with the change in how models are advertised in the magazine.  This highlights that it is not a question of nostalgia, for if it were, I would argue that everything was better in the 1990s, and it wasn't.  However, the content simply is not well written enough for me and I would like to see it improved.  It's also not necessary to back to the 1990s to write good quality battle reports, they used to still produce those in the earlier years of the 2000s too.

I've been reading WD since Issue 129. Fair to say that I've seen a lot of changes in the mag. Some for the better, some worse.

I would definitely agree that the Battle Reports are a lot worse than in the past. They seem to have mistaken a Narrative battle report for something whereby they take unbalanced armies and talk an unfeasible amount of the Udders of Thoth instead of explaining what is going on. Meanwhile, there attempts at a 'tactical' battle report are just as poor.

No, it's fair to say that the old battle reports were of a higher standard than those currently put out. That isn't to say the recent Bat Reps don't have their merits, it's just that they try to squeeze way too much information into too small a space because they are using gigantic pictures instead of maps...which just confuse matters greatly.

Generally, I think that the articles are of solid quality. There are no real stinkers, but it's rare that an article really grips me. In the old days, the quality was all over the show. Some excellent (although these were often lifted directly from forthcoming Codexes) and some downright terrible; the kind whereby the author would come up with a premise and shout 'isn't this a great idea?'...when nobody else agreed that it was a great idea.

Fact is, I tend to believe that the first 30 or 40 issues I collected were the best ever. If I go back and reread them though, I would quickly realise that I was remembering the very best articles and Bat Reps and forgetting the dross that filled in the gaps.

WD has become a fairly large tome. They have scaled down greatly on the amount of overt advertising that they produce. I believe this to be a massive improvement over the last iterations. I know that they have 'soft marketing', whereby, funny old thing, the readers' models are often the ones they've been pushing overtly recently...but that's way better than 4 pages of different angles for each model. And you get to see alternative takes on the Easy Metal schemes.  The articles are mostly well written and often insightful - and this without just printing 20 pages of the next Codex out.

WD is a flawed beast, but an enjoyable one too. If ever they sort out the Battle Reports, who knows, I may even look at this period as the Golden Age of White Dwarf.
WD127 - Started a Love Affair my Wallet Just Can't Cope With...

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #11 on: July 9, 2017, 03:47:34 PM »
Fact is, I tend to believe that the first 30 or 40 issues I collected were the best ever. If I go back and reread them though, I would quickly realise that I was remembering the very best articles and Bat Reps and forgetting the dross that filled in the gaps.

I agree.  There were some poor articles in older White Dwarf magazines too.  In addition, and something that I forgot to mention earlier, some content from old White Dwarf issues would be silly to replicate now, such as a lot of card scratch building articles.

Quote
WD is a flawed beast, but an enjoyable one too. If ever they sort out the Battle Reports, who knows, I may even look at this period as the Golden Age of White Dwarf.

Same here.  If they could just improve the battle reports I'd be much happier.  They were always the centrepiece of a good issue of White Dwarf for me, and this is the main reason why I get so frustrated with the current iterations of the magazine.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Alienscar

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1465
  • Country: 00
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #12 on: July 9, 2017, 05:05:37 PM »
The focus on Primaris Marines isn't surprising and fits with the drive to market Space Marines whenever there is a new release, so I understand why GW has done that and I'm more forgiving of that than you appear to be.

Similar to the furore caused by the imminent release of new Codicies I feel slightly miffed by the prevalence of Primaris coverage. From a business point of it makes perfect sense but for me it just seems contary to their statement that Primaris do not make existing Space Marines redundant. It is probably ridiculous of me but I would just like to see the new edition include the old stuff a bit more.

I do think that the current guise of White Dwarf is an improvement on that which preceded it, but the superficiality of a lot of the articles is a concern for me.

I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. This run of White Dwarf is a lot better than the weekly issues and previous monthly.

G'day Alienscar!
Thanks for the effort, mate. As always was a hoot to read. I think the reason that there is sooo many photos for filler is that they are cheaper than writers. Have more articles and less photos means overpriced magazine. Just a guess though.

You could be right Saim-dann but I though that GW employed salaried writers. If that is true then no matter how much or how little the writers produce the cost to GW is the same.

Am genuinely interested to know, Al. Which do you enjoy more? Reading WD or critiquing it? I ask because it doesn't matter whether you approve or not of an issue, there's always a lot of feeling in your writing. 

Thanks for that Saim-dann I am not a practiced or experienced writer so I appreciate you saying you can sense the feeling.

Quote from: Starrakatt
"Russ, get your work done or you won't see your damn console for the next month!"
Quote from: Cavalier
Honestly Alienscar, we get it... you dont like painting!

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: White Dwarf June 2017
« Reply #13 on: July 9, 2017, 06:52:46 PM »
Hey Al, how are you?
The salary writer system can still add or subtract from the price of the issue. Eg: Say a writer is grossly underpaid at $10ph. If he works a full 8hr day on the WD, that $80 is added to the price of the magazines. If, however, he works 4hrs on the WD and 4hrs on another project. Then only $40 dollars will be added to the price of the magazines and the rest of the space filled with cheaper photos.

I'm not saying that this is how WD or GW works. It's just that quantifying the wages to prices is a popular way of business.. Keep on writing, mate!

 


Powered by EzPortal