In a recent video by renowned historian Jordan Sorcery, Jordan noted the following during his deep dive into the development of Warhammer 7th edition:
'There was always a tension between the visions of the Old World as being either a STORY or a SETTING. In one version, the world develops and big changes have consequences going forward; in the other, things never change and move forward.' 'But over time it became clear that it was a losing fight and that the Old World was considered by those above our pay grade to be a setting.' - Graham McNeill, former design studio member.
I often see players keen for narrative development make critical posts noting that happened in Ghur after the launch of 3rd edition. I have also seen comment by no less than The Bard being highly critical of the Warhammer world being treated as a story because the magic is writing the story yourself through your games.
My reflections are that Age of Sigmar has been intentionally designed to satisfy both these camps. During the lead in and launch of a new edition, the STORY is progresses. New opportunities for units and whole armies are created. Then, during the life cycle of the edition, the game becomes a SETTING. Is the lack of story between editions intended to give the players the chance to tell their own memorable story through their battles and adventures?