This train of thought started as I checked out some of my older posts and I realised that I'd actually said that 2 issues of MW on the trot were rather good both 369 and 370 had Big Andy's approval.
As I've said before I've lambasted Henry in the past for issues I considered less than splendid so it behoves me to do the opposite when" the boy done good "
I do find it fascinating though that others consider these issues below par- but mostly avoid saying why other than "its dull no pictures"- paraphrased from a comment of Steve-the-wargamers blog which is a tad harsh and Fritz's comment that he seems to like mags I pan and visa-versa which at least has the advantage of being amusing.
Some chaps do seem to have bother articulating why they dislike something That old circular argument I hate it cos I hate it . Reminds me of a time at Newark show few years back when this ill- mannered oaf comes up to the stand
"Let me see your War of 1812 "
So I gets him some out and he peers at them then says
"I don't like Old Glory"
" They are Anatomically In correct and that is my Personal Opinion "
And Yes he did Emphasise the CAPITALS
So -I not liking his boorishness and the Devil seizing hold of my toe, gave a steely glance up and down his overly short and rotund frame and says sweetly
"Compared to What !"
The point of course is that this fellow- who I believe ran some minor rules outfit or other thought his "Personal Opinion" was the word of God - without any kind of evidence- did he show me Leonardo's Golden section or a Giotto drawing No Gainsborough sketch - nary a smidgin , a soupcon of (for transatlantic readers ) Frederick Remington or Howard Pyle. No nothing, simply a Personal Opinion.
Now again in the great scheme of things this matters rather less than the price of my wife's next pair of Jimmy Choos but having said that surely there is need for some intellectual rigour within our ranks- it's what separates us from the workshop drones ( BUT there is an argument to suggest that they have an intellectual rigour of their own- theirr "Universe" does have a consistant logic - however nasty ). You know the ones who argue about a Games Workshop bolter having a recoil or not or shout "They didn't do that in the 41st Century (and yes gentle reader I've been present at both of those altercations(and other similar asinine variants) and in both cases my peals of unkind laughter were unrestrained.
These days we are supposed to accept that within our hobby there is no essential difference between one who does his reading and plays his historically based games- at whatever level and some dweeb who simply parasitically feeds on anothers imaginings as " its all just gaming innit" and just gets them out of a box and rolls dice.. All one big happy hobby with no separation of thought or knowledge as bland and uninteresting as the as a busload of accountants on a trip to an office supplies convention..
I beg to differ.
It is the very differences that make this hobby so fascinating. There was a time when the public face of our hobby- Show , book and magazines was very diverse indeed this is no longer quite the case- . And yes most of this is about "public face" what Dudes do in private is entirely their own affiar .... also I'm coming to believe that there really is a disconnect between the "public face" which includes many of the larger " Games Companies" and some of the magazine content and what actually happensd in the Clubs and wargames rooms all over Wargamesland. Of course any Games Company wants to sell its games- so fewer is best - you sell more of each that way and its less bother for a larger margin.
One thing that I haven't seen ttouched upon is the fact that "non- historical gaming" is now much larger than the historical side-(and I'm talking non GW here) just look at the number of Kickstarter projects involving Zombies or similar silliness- and that a good 50% of the traders and games at Salute will be "non GW-NON -historical" yet the various sub-genres between them can't support their own glossy magazine not even one .
I am forced to wonder why this is.
Indeed we of the historical bent are told all non- historicals together are " just another period" which I, as an occisional Sci- Fi player, find a tad misleading to say the least likewise if I wanted Horror or non GW fantasy- there is plenty of choice out there but nothing seems to pull it together. Frankly I'd like to see a non- historical gaming glossy- perhaps like RPI of the 80s or the one off issue of Dark Horizons that MW did a couple of years back- something to pull all the disparate threads of the various Fantasy and Sci-fi sub genres together- I'd even read it sometimes.
|A troop/ Suradron of Challengers to add to my modern British Force. I've added stowage and twiddly bits to personalise these models. Not for me merely taking them out of the box and rolling dice- how tedious.|
However now that we seem to have established that actual real battles have little or nothing to do with this hobby (see my 2 previous posts and comments) I begin to wonder what the bloggers think it is all about and I don't just mean a glib reply using the F-word. In theory it should mean different things to different people but I'm wondering if the constant commercial effort of Games companies to "dumb down" and "blandify" is having more of an effect on the bloggersphere than it is on the grass roots.
Having said that- and playing Devils advocate to my own argument I also wonder if these same efforts ARE having and effect on the grass roots. I've no actual proof as the chaps I know all seem to be of the more traditional wargaming view rather than the "gamin' innit" persuasion. Though I do know a fine painter who sometimes seems to be less than impressed by the fact that a good number of his customers expect HIM to know more about the rules THEY expect to use for their games than they do which must be a bit exasperating
Picture the conversation
Customer "paint me a unit for Wundarules version 69 army list 45.2 "
Painter "and which one is that sir"
Customer "What !! you mean I'm expected to know things - actually in my own brain OOOH "
|40mm French Napoleonics.Despite the attempts of "Games Corporate dudes" to homogeonisev the diverse nature of our hobby as long as chaps continue to buy- and some soldier companies continue to make diverse stuff they will fail.|
As regular readers may be aware I've had the same conversation with the Idiot book brigade on numerous occaisionsso its not at all unusual merely a bit of a pity that chaps CHOOSE not to think about what they do and seemingly prefer to be thick... That some at least seem to have de-evolved (devolved?) to the level of children playing snakes and ladders seems to be apparent . I've even had a conversation with a somewhat hysterical chap in one of the Linked-in groups maintained that wargaming was about selling lots of toy soldiers (product was his term) and was in no way any kind of intellectual excercise- he seemed to infer that the target market should be children - Well no I think not. As an adult I have "put away childish things"- well mostly anyway and have no desire to return there for a hobby or more especially be led there by the "Games Corporate Dudes" who think they can sell me any kind of lightweight twaddle and I'll accept it because its in a pretty box..
So to answer my own poser... well sort of yes and no... maybe ... sometimmes- more than they used to be...