I still remember how I read a bit about this confusing w40k lore, just for laughs researched those over the top primarch legends etc. I had some fun that day, but little did I know that within three months I would become a w40k fanatic myself. That initial shock after reading Horus Rising by Dan Abnett - priceless. It wasn't funny no more, it was astonishing.
Now, years later I got a bit better and from a distance I see that there are in fact two warhammers 40k. One being the popular franchise, the visual style, simplistic storylines, god awful games like Space Marine, big business overall. I don't really like that one, stupid one dimensional characters, no story at all, it's almost like an unintended satire.
Second is being hidden underneath all that, often unbeknownst to tabletop players as well. All the lore, all the historic timeline of events, stories, characters. Suprisingly well written concept of roughly realistic concept of human evolution through millenias. But even then one needs to know that there are crappy books from the early days and there are next gen books from outstanding authors.
It is a real pain in the ass to get into w40k lore, much confusion where to start (10.000 years of storyline total).
Zhukov said:
It doesn't seem to realise that for all the grimdark-doom-death to have any weight you need to have something to contrast it with.
The contrast in the universe is done diffrently: the early glorious days of hoper and victory in 30th millenium and the grim and dark outcome of loss in 40th millenium. And it does work once you get into it, but it would require to start from Horus Heresy era (30k) to get that vibe, that humanity is finally going to achieve something great, everyone is nice and awesome and glorious victories are provided in the package. I simultanousely read books from both periods and I find it entertaining how everything has an extremly diffrent outcome in the future.