Personally I think it's a decent cover. Not as good as RT but good.

Although a more usual Marine one. A DeathWatch valiant last stand

would have been good.

I dont know why they dont get Mike Vallencout involved.

ThenDoctor said:

...And by the same token, I could say that if the art's not important to you, then your answer is to "...shut up and sit down quietly and quit annoying the people who want to talk about..." how the art does affect their perception and enjoyment of the game. But does that really help? This is a separate thread, and you're certainly welcome to ignore the hell out of it. I sure hope no one's coercing you in any way to read it.

But to answer your question: yes, I do believe that it does matter how the art looks. First, from my own personally POV, I know that art does indeed color how I view something, this is even more important for me with RPGs since they are games of imagination, and art holds a strong influence on how I imagine things. Is it the only thing I consider when I'm looking at an RPG (or anything else, for that matter)? No. But it is a major factor. And considering how much money gets spent on the visual arts in all the entertainment industries, I would be inclined to believe that it's a big deal for a lot of other people. I mean, if it didn't matter at all, then why would a company like FFG bother spending the time and money they do on art and backgrounds and layout and such? Why not just save all that and have a giant wall of B&W text? I know that I've personally had discussions with a number of people who are willing to pay for higher production values, because it matters to them. Some of that I don't understand either, such as all the folks who gladly supported the $100+ price tag of WFRP 3E, on the grounds that they were happy to pay more all around for the high quality fiddly bits. But just cuz I don't get it, it doesn't mean it's not a real and valid consideration for them.

Court Jester said:

To know that someone got paid for this piece causes something deep down inside to break and makes me now certain that somewhere right now a small child is being repetidly kicked in the crotch. What kind of world do we live in? What kind of world...?

Graver said:

I really feel FFG have dropped the ball on the artwork in DW. There are some blinding efforts, but you usually have to judge a product by the lowest common denominator.

That said, and while i agree that it is somewhat important, artwork is not a primary factor in purchasing an rpg book, it's the mechanics. So far DW hasn't enticed me.

On another point, Rogue Trader has been sitting on my shelf since i bought it at launch... cause it's just not complete enough for me to warrant switching from the already richly padded out Dark Heresy.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Fantasy Flight Games, evaluate and change your model of core books leaving out important details, and constantly releasing "free pdf supplements" to cover the fact that you screwed up including all the content neccessary.

WTF!?

Is this really the art in the book?

Are you kidding?

John Blanche save us!

Graver said:

I agree, the other pieces are at least forgivable, but this is a TRAVESTY. This made it past the art directors and is actually going to be PUBLISHED? And someone is going to get PAID?

I notice art in a book. If it's good then it makes me feel warm and fuzzy. If it's bad then I just feel insulted. If you are selling a product then you need to make sure that the product is polished and finished. It's not as though there is a dearth of good WH40k art out there. When I see a picture like the one above in a roleplaying book, I wonder what else they've skimped on (like editing and playtesting, perhaps?).

I actually think that I recognise the style of that particular artist and suffice to say that if this is the case, that piece is certainly not up to his normal standard. Indeed, that kind of looks like one of his concept pieces, or the kind of thing that he pulls together for a client before he actually produces the final work.

Kage

I'm pretty sure my cat could come up with better art than that. It's the background that really sceams "awfull". Gotta stop hiring 95 year old artists, FFG. I hope that is the only exception to the otherwise consistant fine art delivered by FFG. Or I think I'm going to have to submit my resume to push this crap out of existance. Hey FFG! I'll do better for half the price! No, Seriously! I'm NOT joking,

Graver said:

Yeah when I saw that for the first time my jaw dropped. It's freakin' awful.

Mithras said:

I look forward to seeing your cat's artwork. And perhaps your own as well.

While I'm not a huge fan of that particular work, I doubt that I could do better. Well, unless I use lots of cheating technologies, like 3d art.

Kage

Kage2020 said:

The only cheating there is in creation is not being the one who did the creating. Thew only way to fail at creating is to not put in the work needed to master the tools and techniques chosen and the effort required to complete the process.

Either way, I hope you're right about that being just a rough sketch. I thought it might be a piece by who ever did the wall-banger on pg 20 of Dark Heresy: Ascension, but on a second and third look, the styles don't match up. I guess my mind just jumped at that one as, to date, that one sticks out in my mind as the crowning moment of suck in the published 40k rpg art... it looks like it came strait from a high school art class. Although I vaguely recall seeing another piece in roughly that style, I can't for the life of me place it. I do remember I wasn't terribly impressed and I don't think it was much more refined then the above atrocity... it was just b/w and small perhaps... or I could just be attaching another piece I didn't like to this one...

What pother pieces has the artist you're thinking of done?

To add to the actual conversation, though, the art quality of a book is very important. I'm a very visual person and I really latch on to imagery. If you present me with an illustration of something, then any time that thing comes up in a game, that illustration is what my mind will conjure to represent it in the scene in my head. If it's an incompetent illustration, doesn't hold the atmosphere of the setting well, or is otherwise incongruous to the rest of the setting, then it will simply not fit in my mind. As a result, the piece of the game that such an illustration represents would be harder for me to use or take in the right light and if that illustration is the only visual representation of such a thing, then, chances are, that thing will become unusable to me. If the entire setting is filled with such poor quality illustrations, then, no matter how brilliantly written the game is, in my minds-eye, it will look atrocious and feel utterly wrong. I wouldn't be able to play it for long without a LOT of work to change the images in my head.

Granted, the above piece won't hurt my visual image of librarians or Space marines, mostly due to the shear amount of work concerning them that's out there, but I still believe that if you don't have a good illustration of something, then you shouldn't have an illustration of it at all. What can possibly be added by bad illustration? Quality over quantity and all that.

Not only is that art bad, but it's not even accurate... Power Armor's helm don't look anything like that (What are those coils? And the 'crest' on top isn't something that stays there when you take the helm off).

Tarkand said:

with note to that artwork posted above - where are the "Oath Scrolls" on the marines - surely an intrinsic part of Astartes psychology