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.

I love the bits/add-ons companies. I think its great having choices beyond the few that GW gives. I hvanet played 40k since 2nd Ed, and if 6th isnt a drastic improvement over the current version I wont be back to playing it. Ill keep using my GW minis with other systems.

I remember the days when GW would have liked them as well. The days when there were articles in White Dwarf about how to scratch build terrain, modify minis, etc. Now its just "buy our product and our product only". I miss the old GW....

They offer alternatives and variety to the HHHobby. I like them and will continue to use them. In most cases, they are more expensive than GW, so you're not saving money by using them. You're adding variety to the gaming table, which is important to me since I'm mainly a modeler/painter.

Ouze wrote:so, Panic posted something in a different thread that I thought might make for an interesting discussion; but would be OT in the one it was posted in. So, forking over to here:

Panic wrote:It also removes the need for third party ripoffs of things like Tervigons and Tomb blades. IMO these parasite companies are tarnishing the hobby, so I'm glad GW are taking steps to take the wind from their sails.

Panic...

I've seen other users post similar sentiments previously. So, what do you guys think - Stormraven extensions, Razorback tops, Carnifex-to-Tervigon kits - are the makers of these kits parasites, feeding off of GWS's successes?

No.

If GW wanted to fill the markets with the quality that they so proudly spout out about, they wouldn't have such stiff competition, along with the fact that they act like assclowns over some of the most ridiculous things- (Blood BoWEL, being one, gorkamorka, necromunda, and the rest of the specialist games line, being the other)

To GW, its more important to sue, then to shut down these so called "Parasites" with quality.


along with that- look at the "Parasites " in question. Are you seriously saying these third order products are not wanted? That the companies are just "infecting you"?

The markets has spoken. GW doesn't like it when they price people into submission, but then cries when others take the candy out of thier hand for being stupid?


Keep on playing....

Frazzled wrote:

doc1234 wrote:

Buttons wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Of course they're parasites. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy their products.

Pretty much this. They are in fact benefiting because GW is big, but it doesn't mean that they aren't offering a nice product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
You're an old fart too HBMC. Do you remember back when GW had its own bits service, if there were bits manufacturers at that time? I'd proffer GW created their own monster when they ended that service. It left a big void that needed filling.

GW used to have a bitz service? Why did they get rid of it?

If i remember they ditched the service because (paraphrasing my local store, i didnt know they stopped it till a few months back) "The cost of maufacturing the individual sprue bitz was losing more money than they made selling the specific parts people needed"

Indeed they had a service. I bought a freight train of power weapons, plasma weapons etc. that way. I think they just got greedy, trying to get you to buy entire kits.

It was awesome when you could flick through the Citadel Miniatures catalogue and order any mini or bits in it by giving the UK a ring. I remember getting my Genestealer Cultists and Patriarch this way There would certainly be a demand for this way of ordering nowadays. Surely they could make money from it by bringing it back?

They did a half-assed reboot of the bits order service by putting things in packs... Some of the packs even made sense! Like the Deathwatch one, where you get all the deathwatch bits you need for a squad rather than buying them individually. Some of the packs are a bit fail though, and a lot of the bits not in packs are just gone

First off I think the thread title is misleading. There is a difference between full kits and add-on bitz. I'm pretty sure this is Panic's issue as well.

Selling kits to make units that aren't out yet but are in GW books is bad. Hence the Tervigon and Tomb Blade reference. I'm all for 3rd party bitz. Additional items to spruce up regular models.

Now in the Tervigons case I was only against the use of the name, not the kit itself since it requires a GW kit to build.

However, I'm against creating full on units like PuppetofWar does in the tomb blades, wraiths, spyders. This, to me, is leeching off another's work. It isn't a kit that needs a GW kit to use. It's a full independent kit of a GW branded item. These are sales out of GW's pocket entirely. To me that part is wrong.

So in conclusion add-on bitz are great. Full kits that don't require GW kits to build are over the line. Fantasy is one thing as that IP is pretty heavily diluted. But for me 40k is a different beast.

I'll probably catch grief for my opinion but there it is. It's why I'm glad their going back to full release with a codex honestly.

There is no one catch all answer. I have no problem with 3rd party parts as such but the way they are marketed can get my back up (irrational as that may be). For example, Chapterhouse using GW terms directly. I found that annoying and a step too far. Of course, the legality of that is to be decided. In addition, if they are not feeding off GW's IP, why are their new Empress warriors Tru Scale? Tru Scale compared to what? Another company's not really 8 foot tall scaled 28mm figures! They should have the confidence to market them as Empress Warriors or whatever. On the other hand, my current favourite 3rd party Victoria Lamb. Do her figures rip off GW Praetorians or do they fill a gap in the Victorian Sci Fi market while also being a way to add variety to my GW Praetorians? I look at it as being the latter and accept those models cannot be used in a GW store.

I don't see how it harms consumers that GW has made a game popular enough for other companies to be able to sell products that fit into it.

There's some kind of moral anger about the idea that someone else can legally make these add-ons and extra kits, and that is what leads people to call such companies "parasites".

I don't see it like that. It's not as if the official GW Stuff is really original in itself. Even the 40K is a reworking of long-standing images and tropes.

Anyway, where do you draw the line at "full kits"? My entire IG army is going to be non-GW models. Does that mean that Tamiya, Italeri, Hasslefree and Copplestone Castings are parasites?

Hulksmash wrote:However, I'm against creating full on units like PuppetofWar does in the tomb blades, wraiths, spyders. This, to me, is leeching off another's work. It isn't a kit that needs a GW kit to use. It's a full independent kit of a GW branded item.

Puppetswar don't make Tomb Blades, they make Cyber Bikes
They don't make Canoptek Wraiths, they make Cyber Arthropods
They don't make Canoptek Tomb Spyders, they make Cyber Giant Beetles

no GW branding is being used - in fact using GW branding is pretty much off the table for most 3rd party manufacturers.

You can argue for overall design, or concept, or idea being used, but GW branding is one of the things that these manufacturers are categorically not using, especially puppetswar (Chapterhouse started off doing so, but stopped fairly sharply)

@Charax

Split hairs how you like but it is taking money out of the pocket of the company they are relying on to stay afloat. This isn't a thread about legality, it's about opinion. Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

3rd party add-ons are fine. Full kits of gw units are not. Again, it's not a legality thing, it's a personal opinion.

Those damn buggers are robbing GW of its deserved money, so GW has to increase their prices again and again just to make that little money to survive.

I hope the OP was a troll.
you need a living host to be a parasite, leeeching off a dying one is not parasitic

Hulksmash wrote:Again, it's not a legality thing, it's a personal opinion.

Yep, and it's my personal opinion that if you don't know what the word branding entails you shouldn't be using it, especially when making accusations against others.

Same with any other word, really.

I agree with HulkSmash. I'm cool with modding kits. I ride a Harley, I'm used to modding kits. If a kit requires you to buy the original, and then mod it, that's a pretty reasonable test that it's okay. I like Chapterhouse's Stormraven extension kit, for example, but it's useless without a Stormraven. It's not taking money out of the original IP owner's pocket, as they get their cut cause you buy the original kit.

I'm cool with models that -could be- something else. Puppet's War just released an orc airplane. Coincidence or not, it released around the same time as GW's planes. But, it isn't derived from anything in a GW codex, nor does it look like the GW model. It's its own design, and while it could represent a GW model in a game, it also stands alone as its own thing. Avatars of War is a good example of these. Clearly, their line is heavily influenced by GW aesthetics, and any of their models could be used as a Hero/Lord in WHFB, but, they've got their own game going too, and fantasy creatures are generic enough that they've made the effort to be seen as doing their own thing.

I'm not cool with blatant ripoffs of someone else's creative work. Chapterhouse's "female farseer", for example, is a ripoff of GW IP, maybe not legally, but definitely ethically. They made no effort to represent it as anything except a GW replacement. It's not a mod to an existing GW kit. That, for me, is over the line. They didn't even make the effort to call it female space elf wizard. I guess they've renamed her a "Doomseer" now, but still...

@Charax

I get it. You can't refute the concept and so choose to insult and belittle. It's cool man. But as a heads up branding can include images and concepts. Check the definition. It's not just names friend.

One should know the FULL definition before assuming a position of mental superiority

Hulksmash wrote:@Charax

Split hairs how you like but it is taking money out of the pocket of the company they are relying on to stay afloat. This isn't a thread about legality, it's about opinion. Can you tell me they would have produced those models without the Necron Codex?

It's not splitting hairs though. It boils down to competition. Sure, you can rage all you like about the cheaper, "generic" kits that ape the GW kits, but calling them parasitic is dishonest at best. A sale lost to a competitor is just that. This process isn't new, it's pretty much a defining characteristic of capitalism. You see it all the time. Essentially, as long as the "generic" company doesn't use GW trademarks, they are pretty much good to go. Will the inspiration be obvious? Sure! Will some people avoid them because they want to stay "pure GW (or GW tournament legal)"? You bet! Will GW have to keep innovating to stay "on top"? Yes, and that's a good thing.

As far as bits companies, I'm not sure how you could call their relationship with GW anything other than symbiotic.

And to address the "money that GW deserves" comment from earlier in the thread, that's utter tripe. GW provides a luxury product. They don't deserve a damn thing. People either like their product and buy it, or they don't.

People really need to note that "Symbiosis" and "Mutualism" aren't synonyms and interchangeable.

Either way, I'm assuming "parasitism" here is being referred to in a business sense. In that case, I can't find ay definition online that fits the meaning.

At best, the relationship between 3rd party bits manufacturers and GW would be commencialism. 3rd Party companies benefit whereas GW is barely affected. Surely you have to buy a Stormraven to use your Chapterhouse Stormraven kit, but you were going to buy a Stormraven anyways, and those that buy just for the Chapterhouse kit are rare.

Redbeard wrote:I'm cool with models that -could be- something else. Puppet's War just released an orc airplane. Coincidence or not, it released around the same time as GW's planes. But, it isn't derived from anything in a GW codex, nor does it look like the GW model. It's its own design, and while it could represent a GW model in a game, it also stands alone as its own thing. Avatars of War is a good example of these. Clearly, their line is heavily influenced by GW aesthetics, and any of their models could be used as a Hero/Lord in WHFB, but, they've got their own game going too, and fantasy creatures are generic enough that they've made the effort to be seen as doing their own thing.

I'm not cool with blatant ripoffs of someone else's creative work. Chapterhouse's "female farseer", for example, is a ripoff of GW IP, maybe not legally, but definitely ethically. They made no effort to represent it as anything except a GW replacement. It's not a mod to an existing GW kit. That, for me, is over the line. They didn't even make the effort to call it female space elf wizard. I guess they've renamed her a "Doomseer" now, but still...

So the existence in a GW Codex is the only threshold?

Ork aircraft have existed in Forgeworld for quite some time now, and the PuppetsWar model looks different, but is essentially the same niche.
How is this any different than releasing a clearly female Farseer model that GW does not already make? People have been asking for a female Farseer for quite some time now.
What about the Tervigon models that had not been released by GW yet and had been provided by 3rdparties? This is "ethically" and especially intentionally meant to be a GW replacement/stand-in.

Plus, the Doomseer has always been labelled a "Doomseer" with some silly character name; it was never explicitly named a "Farseer", the colloquial name for the most common Farseer loadout.
Does the naming gimmick really matter that much to you?

After market parts manufactures have a place in many industries. They often increase the value and enjoyment of the purchaser and serve to individulize the product that would otherwise be "generic" to other purchases of an identical manner. It is no different for bitz makers. Every bit goes on a GW figure is not parasitic but an enhancement.

Speakers, key boards, docking stations, skins for your iPod/iPhone/iPad
Running boards and decorative rims for your Ford.
Ninja Orc heads for your Ork army.

These are all the same for me.

Parasite is a bad term to use for companies making additional bitz.. Making and selling a kit to personalize a model isn't a big deal. However buying a FW model, making a mold of it and selling the recast is a different story.

So long as GW is intent on pricing people out of the market, they create a demand for lower-cost options. Other companies move in to fill the market. Simple economics.

Are the Perry Brothers parasites for producing fantastic-looking Renaissance/Medieval minatures that can be used in place of GW Empire/Brettonian minis... for significantly less cost per model?

Is Mantic a parasite for producing a parallel game with parallel models that can be used in place of GW models... for a HECK OF A LOT less cost per model?

Of course not! They are taking advantage of a niche in the market that GW has DELIBERATELY left unfilled. And if GW doesn't want them filling it... GW needs to fill it themselves.


(This, of course, does not apply to companies making DIRECT COPIES of copywritten GW material. That is covered under copyright infringement. Making something different but similar is NOT.)

IcyCool wrote:It's not splitting hairs though. It boils down to competition. Sure, you can rage all you like about the cheaper, "generic" kits that ape the GW kits, but calling them parasitic is dishonest at best.

I disagree. Would those kits have been produced without the Necron Codex? If the answer is no then they certainly meet the basic definition of a parasite according to Miriam-Webster:

3: something that resembles a biological parasite in dependence on something else for existence or support without making a useful or adequate return

I bolded support since not all of what Puppet Wars does meets that definition but they are certainly dependent, at this time, on GW and in the case of the "Cybernetic" line not making a useful or adequate return for the parent organism.

Again I'm all for third party add-ons for any model range since I love making unique armies that require kits from the company they are for. I'm just against full kits from companies that don't produce their own games or their own IP. And I'd feel that way if it was WarmaHordes or Infinitey or any other major game system.

@Vulcan

I'd point out that Mantic and the Perry brothers produce their own games for use with the models they make. I don't in any way consider them parasites and it's probably why most others don't either.

As long as I don't get worms, Lyme disease or some freaky little fish up my urethra... as long as this doesn't happen, I don't care.

Hulksmash wrote:Again I'm all for third party add-ons for any model range since I love making unique armies that require kits from the company they are for. I'm just against full kits from companies that don't produce their own games or their own IP.

Except PuppetsWar does produce their own IP.

Look at their Orc airplane or the shoulderpads (seriously Puppetswar...release these soon). They're unique intellectual property that is distinct from what is available from GW.

@Bicat

What models are the shoulder pads meant to go on?

Hulksmash wrote:I bolded support since not all of what Puppet Wars does meets that definition but they are certainly dependent, at this time, on GW and in the case of the "Cybernetic" line not making a useful or adequate return for the parent organism.

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree, but to address the above statement:

You appear to be making two assumptions:
1. Puppet'sWar would cease to exist or be doomed if GW ceased to exist.
2. Competition is not beneficial to GW.

Suffice to say, I disagree with both.

Giving me, as a consumer, more choice is excellent and I applaud it.

It is for GW to make 'the best model soldiers in the world' and for me to decide if I agree with that and pay them for it or decide I prefer another company's product and spend my money there.
GW has existed in a vacuum for a long time, competition should be healthier for it and even, heavens portent, put the issue of pricing on GW's agenda and consideration.

IP laws exist, GW have never been shy about sending letters employing the threat of legal action. If a company is breaking the law, the court will make that judgement, not GW nor it's more ardent supporters.

My take:

If you are making aftermarket products for a line of Citadel miniatures, utilizing 'fair use' guidelines, you are perfectly fine.

Cheap knock offs that aren't a direct copy of your product? Well, suck it up and make your product better than the competition. Would these products exist without GW? Probably not. But that's what GW has to deal with. It gets even worse for GW, now, with the explosion of OTHER miniatures rules out there, and the end of the Citadel-Model-Only tournament circuit. GW has lost the 'moral high ground', and anyone can use any miniatures with the rules, barring a handful of locations (GW property).

If you are making direct copy knock-offs? This has been going on since the dawn of time, and has nothing to do with GW, Citadel, Forgeworld or anyone else. Cheap near-duplicates are the bane of anyone's manufacturing industry (Prada handbags? Fake Rolex watches?). Good luck chasing down those Russian and Chinese recasters, as an example. Anyone who does this where GW can reach, legally, should expect to be shut down, deservedly so.

Where you get into trouble:

Using GW Intellectual Property without permission, in violation of the "Fair Use" laws of your country of origin.

Hello, Chapterhouse.

--B.

Bonus Tangent: The fact that people are 'discussing' this who aren't aware of GW's own Bits Service, and the history therein, gives weight to the "Defend GW at all costs" people being ill-educated/walking around with blinders on.

Hulksmash wrote:@Biccat

What models are the shoulder pads meant to go on?

Space Marines.

Doesn't mean they don't have unique IP.

@Icycool

I'm cool with competition. I'm all for Warmahordes, Mantic, The Perry's games, Dust Warfare and the like. I think that's the only way that GW will have competition and possibly readdress some of their business practices. But all of those are creating games and models to compete. They are creating their own worlds and identities. I'm totally cool with that.

As for my other "assumption" I don't think Puppet'sWar would cease to exist. I do think they might have existed at all without GW and that they'd be hammered hard if GW went away.

However I'll agree to disagree.

In fact I'll put out one last thought and then I'll bow out

I think that without GW the 3rd party bitz market might not exist at all if everything else in the market was the same. If GW, through the years, hadn't encouraged customability and converting inside of their massive universe then none of this would exist as it stands.

Think of Warmahordes (the closest thing GW currently has to a real competitor). How many people convert models for their armies? How many 3rd party bitz are made for Warmachine or Hordes? "Unique" armies don't really exist there from what I've seen at events and game nights.

How many 3rd party bitz are built for any game range out their outside of GW? I'm all for 3rd party bitz. I think they are part of the "GW Hobby" as much as anything else. Just ethically dislike straight stand-in kits for GW's, or anyone elses, games. Just my thoughts.

I think that the 3rd party manufacturers likely encourage sales to GW, as people will get more figures to use the extra bits. There are very few 3rd party things that can entirely replace GW models. Anyway, since when did your battlefield have to be GW pure?

The belief that anyone profiting on the fringes of GW's sucess is a parasite to be stamped out is an attitude that GW have fostered very well. Many model manufacturers are happy for their products to have aftermarket kits particular if their particular models are named as being suitable for the conversion. That way they sell several version of that model to feed hobbyists' needs to make every different version of a vehicle. GW on the other hand don't seem to agree that people buying more of their figures to make use of some 3rd party pieces as a good thing, and seek to destroy them when possible. So much for 'the hobby'. This is why they push their terrain kits more and more and seem to avoid discussing the home-made approach to making terrain. Once they prided themselves on giving advice on how to make terrain cheaply (as their hobby has always been expensive), but now terrain is just one more revenue stream to be exploited and increasingly tables in GW stores everywhere look very much the same as they push the product.