NYT Warhammer article

[Krug]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/arts/15warh.html?pagewanted=1

 

[MonsterMash]

GW have been very good at the building market for what they call the 'Games Workshop hobby' by using warhammer 'evangelists' and they actually advertise for people to do this for them in White Dwarf. But one big advantage they have is the visual appeal of the miniatures, which may be why the D&D and SW miniatures games may often be the best route for stores or clubs to use in demonstration games.

It does help to back my argument that D&D needs to expand organically - not with money wasted on expensive press adds.

 

[diaglo]

i have the article at home for anyone that wants to read it.


it mentions D&D too as a comparison.

 

[Krieg]

i have the article at home for anyone that wants to read it.

Trying to lure poor defenseless ENWorlders into your den of iniquity yet again eh?

 

[Desdichado]

So, can anyone summarize, or cut and paste for those of us who are not subscribers to NYT Online?

 

[diaglo]

Summary: Warhammer is 4 l00zrz


actually it just talks about how it is spread by word of mouth. how expensive a hobby it can be. the type of players it attracts. where they play. and so forth.

 

[Eridanis]

A pretty even-handed article; the distain only slips out once or twice.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

Trying to lure poor defenseless ENWorlders into your den of iniquity yet again eh?

Or is that den of OD&Diquity.

And who here HASN'T encountered the Cult of Warhammer? But, neat seeing it in "big time" print.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

The article is pretty fair by and large. Though I get the sense that there would still be people who read it and have no idea what is going on.

 

[IronWolf]

So, can anyone summarize, or cut and paste for those of us who are not subscribers to NYT Online?

NYT is free registration. For those who would rather not render their personal details, head here:

http://www.bugmenot.com/