Saturday, 1 February 2014

Reading the new GW magazines.

So the new format of White Dwarf and the brick that is Warhammer: Visions just hit my doorstep and I've had a read. So is it an improvement? Does the split format deliver greater consistency for the different types of gamers?

In a word, no. As we have come to expect from the Daddy of the miniature games industry the quality of the production is really high. They both feel great in aesthetic and paper quality. Size wise Visions is similar to the handbag editions of the fashion magazines and thick! Whilst the new WD is the same page size as last months but feels like the booklets you get at a convention in thickness.

White Dwarf
- Yes it has rules for one unit the Dwarf King but it's still just a catalogue for 90% of the magazine with too many pages devoted to each product.
- Jervis' article seems to be moving more towards the 'here's some experimental rules you could try' so a semi-thumbs up to him as I always found his articles pretty dull. At least this way there is something to add to your game.
- It has some of those old WD bits from years ago like Ask Grombrindal, bits of the week etc which feel like a bit of fun.
-I can't see me picking it up, even if it has rules for a new unit I might buy I'm not interested in paying £2.40 to get two paragraphs of text that will be regurgitated all over the blogs within an hour of publication or be printed in the army book that could come out in a few weeks.

- All the bits I didn't like about the old White Dwarf, too many pages of different shots of new models that I can see o the internet (GW painted) and then packed out with loads of photos of other peoples models (which whilst being very well painted I just couldn't care about beyond going 'oh, that was clever').
- Has quite a few Paint Splatter pages but just wish their were the old 'Eavy Metal tutorials instead.
- The worst battle report I've ever seen. It's just lots of photos of models on the board with practically no explanation of deployment or mission. It is as though the designers decided to 'bring a novel to life with images' rather than document and analyse a game.
- Interestingly the book is in three languages meaning that whilst a quick scan of the pages makes it look detailed you are actually only getting a third of what you first expect.

White Dwarf - 2/5 Dave's. I can see how some might like to spend £10 a month on a bit of fun but I'll be using it to buy more games and looking at the models on GW's site.

You'll like it if: You have no internet connectuona nd live in a games store (or you are a rich 12 yr old)
You'll dislike it if: You are old enough to remember when White Dwarf had card inserts each month.

Visions - 0.5 Dave's. It doesn't do a single thing for me and I'm going to use my three pounds a month to buy the new Firefly digital comic.
You'll like it if: You're a hoarder of pictures of miniatures.
You'll dislike it if: You want something more than pictures.

1 comment:

  1. Its quite sad to say, but i gave up on the previous incarnation of white dwarf ever being worth picking up some time ago and had literally zero faith in their ability to make these 'new' offerings a desirable product.
    Visions just seems truly dreadful. It really does seem ludicrous to me that they seem to think putting loads of photos of miniatures in a monthly publication would be worth buying. Its as if they arent aware the internet exists.
    If visions was free, like pictures on the internet are, id probably pick it up.