An open letter to GW about Warhammer Visions

I originally sent this to GW in reply of the second email telling me to ask Apple for a refund after Apple told me to ask GW for a refund. It escalated quickly though I think I stayed on the polite side.



I have to say that I am very fed up by being brickwalled by both you and Apple as both of you tell me to contact the other party for a refund. I would be happy if this issue which is probably not an isolated cases judging by the people I know who are cancelling their subscription alone could be resolved between the two of you as I am not happy spending money on a glorified picture book.

I also had to notice that Issue 2 of Warhammer Visions was also downloaded on my iPad as this now seems to be done automatically and this issue is even worse than issue 1. I am aware that you are not involved in the production of this sorry excuse for a magazine but you might forward it to the people who are, if only so they stop alienating faithful customers. As I have previously noted, I have been a WD reader since January 1996 and this month marks the first time I intentionally won’t be buying it. I had to see that the ‘Battle Report’ was nothing but the picture version of the one printed in White Dwarf Weekly. Am I supposed to hold the two together to get one decent battle report? Likewise, half of the other pictures were rehashes of pictures printed online or in other publications. Which would be ok if there was also written content, but not here. And why would I want to pay you for pictures I can see online for free? Heck, if I want pictures of GW models, I can find dozens of websites doing a better job than yours, also for free.

I know that Warhammer Visions is intended for the people interested in the painting side of the Hobby, whereas I am more interested in the gaming side. But then at least be honest enough to refund the people who don’t want a picture book.

I have seen a steady decline in the quality of codices, with game balance and rules design playing second fiddle to selling large kits and childish fluff, but I have nevertheless stuck to GW so far. However, this issue might be the final straw that pushes me towards getting my models from other shops or even other companies. I am aware that I am but one customer, but your last stock report suggests that I am not the only one who thinks so. I hope that your design team and decision makers realise that your name is GAMES Workshop, not models Workshop and that people buy your models and books to use in their games, not to look at pretty pictures.

Best regards,

Charles Thoss


2 thoughts on “An open letter to GW about Warhammer Visions

  1. Having no much love for GW’s hobby-prints is a common and increasing approach I have to face on my shifts and likely everytime I scroll through da web.

    I, too, see a constant decline in quality of the WD. Where content is king, the Dwarf is a pauper. Your disaffection with the content is completely understandable. That this unhappiness evolves into a source of bile, since you face a customer service dead end, is easy to understand, too, down to the core. I heavily doubt there’ll be a reply that addresses both the refund and the content problem. I even doubt you’ll get a refund soon.

    I clearly sympathize with your open letter approach, but GW never replies on this. Not on those, that got super awesome famous (like Miniwargaming talking about price rising and simultaneous Finecast releases:, or open letters that have a very customer-based perception (, or those swept under the carpet due to delicate topics like sexism in Warhammer & Warhammer 40k (I couldn’t find link).

    But writing an open letter and posting it has at the very least a single very positive effect: it helps the writer to come clear with certain affections about his hobby. When that post will make you realize, that you’re no longer willing to pay 9€ for a photobook, it has a positive outcome. So you safe some dough, you could use on different nerd stuff. And there’s always more nerd stuff to spend money on.

  2. I have also sent it as an email to their customer service. So I might get a personal response on that.

    I could see it as saving money, but you could also see it as highlighting GW’s problem. People hand them so much money already, but they would hand them over even more if they actually produced a decent magazine. I wouldn’t mind paying a tenner per month if White Dwarf included rules and well-written battle reports and other gaming articles and lots of other people would too. But I guess they are happy with the fewer and fewer people they can milk for more and more cash. The way I see it, you now buy the WD Weekly if it contains material that interests you, but not otherwise. As it has become a ‘present this month’s releases and nothing else’, their demographic varies every month. I just have to look at the pile of copies gathering dust in the local GW and FLGS to see that Dwarfs are less popular than the Imperial Knights issue. The old one had at least some content on the systems without releases that month, so there was rarely that feeling of not getting anything for your money. I have millions of armies and I still have had no interest in any of the Warhammer WDs so far, as I could get all the info from the armybook. The Knight one I bought as I wanted to know what was coming to a gaming table near you, but again it was a bit dull.

    I guess that the Black Library is making a ton of cash with their micro-purchase model selling short stories for €3, so now GW wants to milk that cow some more.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s