Saturday, January 28, 2012

Yeah - This Makes Sense...

"Gandalf - noted character from Rogue Trader....ummm, right?"
It's the 25th Anniversary of Rogue Trader, the science-fiction tabletop skirmish game that has really set the tone (arguably) for a generation of gamers.  You're going to have a special edition of your hobby magazine for this anniversary.  You think carefully about the cover, which will set the tone for this edition of the magazine. What says "Rogue Trader" more than a picture of Ian McKellen as Gandalf?

Really? Gandalf?

I love LOTR, but seriously - WTF?  GW - buy a clue.



8 comments:

Karitas said...

Well, it wasn't officially released till games day 87....

So I'm personally expecting big shenanigans in September...

And with the hobbit out this year it's only to be expected that the ailing lotr franchise gets a tie in push...

So I'm not worried yet :)

A-Historian said...

Now see, this sort of thing is why I haven't bought WD for about five years.

Dallas said...

What kind of RT content is there in the mag?

Greg B said...

@ Dallas - not very much. It is all in a "reverse-style" sub issue starting from the back cover. A self congratulatory "through the ages" article with a condescending tone that will have any actual RT era fan lamenting the current state of the game even more.

There is a special anniversary fig - Crminson Fist captain based on the old cover which looks cool, but sadly will be Finecast.

There are almost no pics of RT era stuff - and oddly no pictures of Imperail Guard, but two Harlequins FFS.

Then there are some campaign/scenario games, one set on Rynn's World. The photos are nice, but the games look silly and un playable. I think they mean iit as a "look we've gone from Battle At The Farm to this", completely ignoring/hosing the spirit of RT.

Dallas said...

That's a problem/issue/feature I've noticed in WD "feature" battle reports in the last while - they simply line an unfeasible amount of stuff axle-to-axle on one side of the table and ram it towards an equally absurd amount of stuff on the other side. There is no tactical involvement at all (even by 40K standards!), and the battle looks more like a Dark Age mosh pit than a modern battle with, you know, firearms.

And oh yeah, the LotR emphasis in the mag certainly had the definite odor of "contractual obligation", didn't it!

Greg B said...

@ Dallas - "Dark Age Mosh Pit" - well said! All that's missing from the current WD battle report articles is "Vroom! Vroom" and "KaBoom!" graphics and/or dialogue from the game participants.

REDTROOP said...

Sssh Don't give them idea's.
I bought the January issue of WD with the Vampires and wish I hadn't wasted my money. Never mind I still have a few old issues from RT days (remember the terminator badge cover?)

Unknown said...

every few years GW releases a new edition and every previous edition gets sent to the basement with the ones before as if they are something to be embarrassed of. GW cant keep getting 12-17 year old boys spending their parents money unless they do that.

Now this grumpy old man will shut up and go back to bid warring for Rouge Trader era figures on ebay...