Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi all!
Long time reader, first time poster. Thought I'd start out with a conspiracy =)

Anyways:
In the ork codex on page 84 there is an example of a speed freak army. On my way home from work today I inspected the picture of the army more thoroughly and noticed the following:

1. the six bikers marked '14' are exactly the same as the six bikers marked '12', same pose, same everything...
2. The trukk-boys squad marked '4' is the same as the squad marked '8', again with the same poses and everything.
3. part of the trukk-boys squad marked '6' is reused as trukk-boy squad '10', the 9 in the back of the squad is the same, so is the nob and the big shoota boy. They thought they'd fool me by adding an axe-and-slugga boy to the far left but this one is stolen from the upper left corner of squad '5'.

So, what's up with this? Is this something GW commonly does? I have never noticed it before.

/Grindah

Sure is. Check out the picture in the front of the IG codex. The pic of Creed's own regiment. All photoshopped. Exact same army over and over again. Not that I blame them for doing it, as it would be a complete pain to actually build and paint all of those, but they actually DID do it once for the original 3rd edition SM codex. The complete Ultramarine chapter was painted and presented, along with 2-3 thunderhawks (the old pewter ones).

It's a bit of a cop out IMHO, but I can understand why they do it, as it makes better business sense.

What KiMonarrez said. While the UM chapter pic was cool, it is not as if GW is so flush with success that they can be so wasteful with resources. Of course, the added expenditure of filling out those armies is quite miniscule when put in perspective, but it is expenditure that would be wholly without purpose--it doesn't really help GW or the customer one bit if the photo of Creed's regiment is 100% real rather than shopped.

I agree, it makes sense but in the case of the Ork codex I feel that we are talking about maybe ~ 30 models...

Also the photoshopping is so poorly executed that even I noticed.

But, as I said, I agree, it makes sense...

over and out

Grindah

They have also done it on some of their battlereports. I also noticed it on the Dwarf Army book and a reprint of one of its pictures in White Dwarf. There is a picture of a large dwarf army marching forth from the mountains in columns, if you look carefully you can see that each unit has been reproduced via photoshop to make the army column look much larger.

Oh yeah. I remember that dwarf pic too.

Sort of makes the work they do unimpressive doesn't it?

I have always been impressed by the amount of work they put in to the miniatures when they paint the studio armies but now when i realize they paint 1000 points and photoshop the rest I feel somewhat cheated.

I wish I could do that with my armies

/Grindah

it's something i spotted in apocalypse, and this WASN'T a huge army - check out the photo on the 3Xvindicator box - the scratches on the front dozer blade are exactly the same shap, although they have deleted a couple to try to make them look like different models.

I totally understand why they would do it to large armies but if they have so little faith that they would sell enough box sets of three tanks to warrent painting three tanks for the cover then they shouldn't do it. Yes it may save us the buyer a 5a, but i bet the proportion they save by doing it is more than that! At least show some faith in your own marketing guys.

Take into consideration that the pics in the Ork codex were probably resin boyz they made up before the plastic sprues were finished, and it becomes easier to understand why they didn't make hordes of them, especially when it is soo easy to photoshop them.

A friend of mine was more annoyed that the IG army on the 'splash page' battle scene in Codex: IG has too many HS choices and is thus illegal...

I remember looking at the new space marine codex (when it was new anyway) and looking at the Raven Guard pic in the back. They had a couple of disallowed vehicles (can't remember them off the top of my head) since they were a trait army.

KiMonarrez wrote:I remember looking at the new space marine codex (when it was new anyway) and looking at the Raven Guard pic in the back. They had a couple of disallowed vehicles (can't remember them off the top of my head) since they were a trait army.

You don't have to use traits with Ravenguard, you're just required to use the ones presented if you do want to use traits.

adamsouza wrote:Take into consideration that the pics in the Ork codex were probably resin boyz they made up before the plastic sprues were finished, and it becomes easier to understand why they didn't make hordes of them, especially when it is soo easy to photoshop them.

Good observation, then it totally makes sense.

That being said when GW did the zombie pirates (empire militia+zombie sprues kitbash) they also just painted 10 models and photoshopped them into a full unit.

Now that's lazy.

tegeus-Cromis wrote:What KiMonarrez said. While the UM chapter pic was cool, it is not as if GW is so flush with success that they can be so wasteful with resources. Of course, the added expenditure of filling out those armies is quite miniscule when put in perspective, but it is expenditure that would be wholly without purpose--it doesn't really help GW or the customer one bit if the photo of Creed's regiment is 100% real rather than shopped.

I don't think it's really about the expenditure, as much as the time required to paint models to the proper standard, especially if it's something that's just going to be used once in a photo.

It IS about expendature. They're paying someone or a group good money to paint figures for 1 picture. The time (and therefore money) spent doing that for that 1 picture could be better allocated doing something else. Resource allocation/management 101.

Well, that's true, except that GW often uses miniatures for a lot more than just one picture. They re-use minis all the time for other pictures.

They can either paint one model to exceptional standards and 'shop it, or paint several models to adequate standards. Or spend a great deal of money painting a ton of models to exceptional standards, forcing yet another price hike.

You choose. I'll take door #1.

Valhallan42nd wrote:They can either paint one model to exceptional standards and 'shop it, or paint several models to adequate standards. Or spend a great deal of money painting a ton of models to exceptional standards, forcing yet another price hike.

You choose. I'll take door #1.

I would choose door #1, if I hadn't already chosen door #I'm not buying GW products anymore.

Valhallan42nd wrote:They can either paint one model to exceptional standards and 'shop it, or paint several models to adequate standards. Or spend a great deal of money painting a ton of models to exceptional standards, forcing yet another price hike.

You choose. I'll take door #1.

Gotta disagree.

1 - GW already has over 100 stores staffed with skilled painters and converters. Painting a full unit of zombie pirates (or whatever) just means making better use of this existing resource.

2 - Photoshopping existing minis is not 'free' someone still has to do the photo manipulation and make the models look unique. That same manpower could be put into painting.

3 - Finally, in a hobby whose whole purpose is getting us the fans to buy, convert and paint more, sending lazy messages from the owner of the game is only going to hurt fan enthusiasm. Rule books and WD are GW's platform for showing us how it should be done. When we see lazy photoshopping we conclude that painting, converting, using GW models just isn't as important as we thought.

I saw the original OP, and went wandering elsewhere. I came back, read a few replies, and decided I had a 'Rant' to add.

I used to work in a plastics moulding company here in Brisbane MANY years ago. The stuff GW releases is soooo cheap it makes my eyes water when I pay $65.00 AUS for 5 Terminators. I do still buy because I love the game though.

HOWEVER.....The tight-fisted, money-hungry parasites that keep taking pictures and 're-hashing' them for 'new' releases really grinds my gears.

I mean, how may pics in the APOCALYPSE book were re-prints? I am sick to death of these re-hashed re-prints.


It is just poor business, IMO. Shortcuts to profit=shortcuts to interest.

/End of Rant

Kid_Kyoto wrote:3 - Finally, in a hobby whose whole purpose is getting us the fans to buy, convert and paint more, sending lazy messages from the owner of the game is only going to hurt fan enthusiasm. Rule books and WD are GW's platform for showing us how it should be done. When we see lazy photoshopping we conclude that painting, converting, using GW models just isn't as important as we thought.

Frankly, I would say that with GW crippling it's bitz ordering that according to them converting is certainly not as important as we thought...

From the 40KRadio interview, GW sales has stated that LOTR brings in more money than Bitz Orders ever did.

Also that the bitz packs were made up of the Bitz top sellers. 99% of all the bitz just sold occasionally and it wasn't cost effective to maintain them.

Simply put, keeping the molds easilly accessible, and tracked in a catalouge so we could order them cost GW more money than bitz were bringing in.

That's just OOP models we are talking about. All the new Plastic models come with loads of extra bitz. Anyone with the new Orks or Ogres can attest that they have a mountain of bitz left over.

Sure you can't just order any wacky bit from 15 years ago anymore, and it was fun while it lasted, but you can't seriously blame them for discontinuing the service if it wasn't turning a profit

These reasons for not maintiaining the bits make some sense, I guess. I don't have their numbers (and don't want them, thanks) so I can't really say for myself, but there's enough of a grain of truth there for me to swallow it.

However, put in that perspective, the bitz quasi-demise is starting to remind me a bit of Windows Vista. One of the reasons I was given as to why Vista is so non-reverse compatabile is that it was costing Microsoft time, manpower, and space in the OS code to maintin that level of reverse compatability. So, they started trimming some of the older crap. Makes some sense, but when some of my old computer games got "obsolescencized", it still sucked.

Sometimes, even realizing that the company that makes my toys is strictly out to make a profit doesn't make me feel any less sad about their decisions.

Someone hand me a tissue.

But the bitz question then becomes, what did they do with inventory? It's not like they said 'git em now, when they're gone they're gone' or sold off massive bitz bags like they did in 2002.

they just cut us off, left us in the cold to buy from Battlewagon bitz, Reaper, Hasslefree, Westwind and PigIron.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:But the bitz question then becomes, what did they do with inventory?

Maybe it's time to go dumpster diving outside their main warehouse for some "free bitz"

They let us know months in advance that the bitz were going bye bye.

White Metal is easily melted and recast.

I knew the Bitz department was doomed when the shelves in the old bitz area collapsed under the weight of the cast, but no one really wanted bitz. They were selling them by the pound !! I bought 20lbs worth