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.

The nids dont look that bad.

I wasn't impressed. Some of those models looked like crap...the tyrant guard in particular, where the left arm under the armor plating is just a mess (instead of being...well...an arm) and it was covered in mold lines. The succubus had a messed-up blade and one of the spikes on the agonizer didn't form right, looked like it was just a hole where it should have been. For the tyrant they used all the plastic arms instead of the resin ones, and some of the older kits like raptors didn't even have new pics, just the same old metal models with the same paintjobs they've always had. No pics of incubi either. Lelith didn't look as bad as the one posted here but still worse than the metal in my opinion...

Maybe I'm just trying too hard to find things to nitpick, it's entirely possible, but like I said...GW promised us these would "revolutionize" the hobby, that these were the "finest quality models ever produced", so I don't think I'm being exactly unfair when I hold them under the microscope and point out all the little ways they're inferior to the metals.

And is it just me, or are they being more than a little deceptive by using the painted metals for all the display pics? I realize they don't have time to paint up a whole new batch of crap, but still, it's pretty much an outright lie.

More pics up:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=16600008a

@Sid
No, I agree with what you're saying, some of the paint jobs look rather. . odd. I think I may have caught instances of Photoshopping as well. Also, I hadn't realized they were using plastic arms for the tyrant. . .wow. The product is inferior. Tomorrow, I'm going to pick up 1 blister to see what they're doing. Perhaps, a Succubus, and I'll throw up a review.

lol, I was thinking the same thing...buy a succubus as a "test" to see it in person. Either that, or another archon (which I already have two of) or Lelith which I might never use.

God man, I keep looking at these pics and I keep seeing the same thing: little bits missing off of the end of a blade. It's a really minor thing to complain about, but it still annoys me to no end, I HATE that gak. You're pretty much forced at that point to take your damn knife and carve into the end (shortening the length of the blade even more) so that it actually looks like a sharp blade, like it's supposed to, and like it did when you bought the same model in metal. I think I made my point clear enough already but the fact that these were the examples deemed "good enough" to feature on the website, I am not filled with confidence and I'm pretty sure the $20 I waste on that figure tomorrow will be just that: a waste.

At best i see finecast benefiting nids and Dark eldar the most when done correctly since the edging is what creates the detail but these pictures don't fill me with the most amount of confidence im buying a archon today and ill let you guys know how i get on tomorrow hopefully i can bring some good to this bad situation xD

And of course, the pyrovore...because if no one bought it in metal then they'll surely flock to it in resin, and with a price increase, right?

Go look at the Dark Elf bolt thrower, lmao. The heads on the bolts are miscast like a mother, big holes on each side.

Even the Succubus on the website has a decent chunk missing from the end of the spear, and a few divets from accidental knife strokes. Not to mention, you can catch a few bubbles by the feet. They didn't even clean the damn mold lines off! WTF. Wheres the professionalism?

Sidstyler wrote:

They have NEVER produced models which were always 100% perfect. Why should they be able to do so in resin?

Then perhaps they shouldn't hype the gak out of the new models and all but come out and tell us that they're fething perfect?! No wonder people are upset and had high expectations, GW gave us those expectations by saying gak like:

"There are no other miniatures that exist of this quality and manufactured on this scale in the world"

It's their own damn fault.

And perhaps BMW shouldn't claim their vehicles are "The Ultimate Driving Machine", but they do, and are quite well known for things breaking on their cars all the time. Which in many cases, they don't fix for free. Welcome to the world of marketing. At least GW has a very good reputation for replacing defective products at their expense.

LunaHound wrote:@Delephont

Why would GW hire people to quality check their product lines when they can have GW apologist telling the complaining customers to ***** off for free?

Thats what i hate about GW fan boys. Its not just the audacity of what they say, but they help prolong GW's shameless actions.

Perhaps because in any industry quality control will never be 100% perfect, and most companies have no problem rectifying these issues when they arise, and that's easier than trying to achieve total perfection that a small percentage of the community demands? You act like if you contacted GW about a defective model they would tell you to deal with it, rather than send a free replacement, like they do for everyone who has ever bothered to let them know they received a defective product.

What prolongs GW's "shameless" actions is not the fanboys, but their customers as a whole. And I would hazard a guess that includes 99% of the people bitching about GW's shameless actions, but continue to still buy their products despite their apparent hatred for the company they support. If you don't like how they run things, vote with your wallet. That's the only reaction that matters on any level. But don't single out the "fanboys" when the critics are still buying the products as much as anyone else.

necron2.0 wrote:Adding to the general comments ... yeah. I was in my LGS today, and I noticed they had some of the new Fine Cast minis for sale. On a lark, I bought the Lelith mini and brought it home to compare against a metal one I bought a month or so ago. Basically, the detail is mushy, there is a lot of flash to contend with and (as I had expected from the start) bubbles ... lots and lots of bubbles. I've uploaded images showing a side by side comparison. The minis are both straight out of the blister with no clean up. In image 2 I've highlighted spots where details are almost entirely missing. In short, this is in no way an improvement over the metal.

>> Image 1 <<
>> Image 2 <<

Hmm, parts of that don't look good - particularly the missing chunk of hair.

Grim Smasha wrote:The nids dont look that bad.

Finecast should look a lot better than 'not that bad' to live up to GW's claims.

yakface wrote:
Hmmm 'Failcost' now? First it was 'Finecost' or 'Failcast', but now they've been combined into a word which now shares no similarities with the actual product...fantastic! I suggest we take it even further and choose a completely random word to describe this miniature line. Fzorgle perhaps? Or why stop there, let's use a whole SERIES of words to describe it. How about CRASSUS ARMORED TRANSPORT?

Given what we've seen so far I vote for Miscast.

Cadaver wrote:Perhaps because in any industry quality control will never be 100% perfect, and most companies have no problem rectifying these issues when they arise, and that's easier than trying to achieve total perfection that a small percentage of the community demands? You act like if you contacted GW about a defective model they would tell you to deal with it, rather than send a free replacement, like they do for everyone who has ever bothered to let them know they received a defective product.

Arnt you forgetting something? If i want to start working on a project , and its defective , you know i have to call them and wait 2-3 weeks for replacement to arrive?
Maybe you are the type that drools over the free extra bits from replacement , but i rather not have a defective one in the first place.
Also the GW in Canada dont send the whole kit. They only send me the part that i describe was defective.

It doesnt need to be 100% perfect , but it sure seem to have a rather high % of defects especially for a product that just LAUNCHED.
If GW is seriously trying to win its customers over for a supposedly superior product , then by all means they should be EVEN MORE SO careful.

adamantium|wang wrote:

yakface wrote:
Hmmm 'Failcost' now? First it was 'Finecost' or 'Failcast', but now they've been combined into a word which now shares no similarities with the actual product...fantastic! I suggest we take it even further and choose a completely random word to describe this miniature line. Fzorgle perhaps? Or why stop there, let's use a whole SERIES of words to describe it. How about CRASSUS ARMORED TRANSPORT?

Given what we've seen so far I vote for Miscast.

Given what I've seen so far, combining two snarky portmanteaus into one is just what this product deserves. Failcast it is.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I know it's fun - and easier - for you, Tailgunner, to immediately assume that I go straight for the jugular and never even try to see the (potential) good in anything, but please don't misrepresent me.

Oh come on - there's more than a whiff of hypocrisy in that. Your record on this site, over many years, speaks for itself. You are invariably all over any thread in which GW is being criticised (whether or not they deserve it). This one is a good example - how many times have you posted in this thread already? You have even begun suggesting that the few positive comments about Finecast in this thread have been 'planted'. So don't pretend that my comment misrepresented your attitude. If there was any misrepresentation, it was your own pretence at open-mindedness. As for not 'going for the jugular' (your words, not mine) - the ferocity with which you attack posters who don't jump on your bandwagon (such as Kanluwen) speaks for itself.

In this case, HBMC, I am inclined to share your and others' view of both Finecast and GW's bad handling of its roll-out. But your self-righteous grandstanding and nasty attitude to those who disagree with you make it difficult for me (and, I suspect, others) not to seek to defend GW even when, as here, they seem to have screwed up.

Seeing as though this is turning into the de facto review thread, I'll post one I've found here. Dark Elf Bolt Thrower review. He stays pretty neutral, but the flaws are unfortunately obvious and many. I guess it's to be expected when even the GW picture of the thing has a chunk missing from two of the arrowheads and a bit of what appears to be a piece of the mould on the face of one of the crewmen.

Just been to the shop, bought my first Hive Guard, the detail does look a little better, but the whole tounge is miscast and looks like flash....





The rest looks ok, but not a good first impression, and not for £15.50. I'm considering returning it, but have a feeling it will now be 'can I find the lest mis-cast model' and don't want to end up with a worse one. The price they charge though, surely someone would be having a look over the damn thing before it was being shipped off?

Oh my... each new review and each new picture about the Finecasts is a slap in the face for those that had some kind of respect for the sculpts or miniatures in general... I'm really really sad to see this huge downgrade in quality, Im speechless.

Please would people start to post pics of Finecast models they bought which are really good?

I don't want believe that GW could have ballsed up so much on this launch.

There must be some good castings!

That bolt thrower is hideous...

AngelGrinder wrote:Just been to the shop, bought my first Hive Guard, the detail does look a little better, but the whole tounge is miscast and looks like flash....





The rest looks ok, but not a good first impression, and not for £15.50. I'm considering returning it, but have a feeling it will now be 'can I find the lest mis-cast model' and don't want to end up with a worse one. The price they charge though, surely someone would be having a look over the damn thing before it was being shipped off?

I hate to add to your woe but the vertical spines on the tail are clearly miscast too.

I guess the real question GW should ask is;


What will be your first returned Citadel Finecast Model?

Indeed, but atleast they are fixable. The tounge is a GS only repair....

The rest of the model looks fine, no air bubbles I can obviously see. The back main armour looks a little pitted, but the metal one was similar. Not a great start to my introduction to 'the worlds most amazing models ever!!11oneone!1!!.

So many miscasts! This is really concerning. I don't want to be wasting my time replacing parts, and filling holes on miniatures that I'm already paying a premium for.

What Kilkrazy said, surely there must be some people who've bought some Finecasts without flaws?

AngelGrinder wrote:Indeed, but atleast they are fixable. The tounge is a GS only repair....

That's not the point. I shouldn't have to be re-sculpting whole parts of my model like that, especially one that I paid $25 for (I think the hive guard is $25.50 now?). Miner clean-up, sanding, and filling bubbles I can take, but when entire parts of the model are missing? I don't care how "easy" it is to fix, GW failed to deliver and I'm getting a replacement for it, hopefully one that was actually cast right in the first place.

Why is it small garage outfits can cast models with little to no flaws but GW's "Finecast" models look like that? I'm hoping they just rushed these out the door and that this isn't the kind of quality we can expect in the future, but still, how long are we going to have to wait before the product is finally as good as they claimed?

I hope my first Failcast purchase doesn't look like this.

I bought a (possibly slightly dubious) alternative Vulkan He'Stan model from a seller in Russia on eBay - That was cast perfectly except for one flaw in the socket where the halberd blade joined the shaft, which was easily fixed.

I am a bit worried by all these pics - I for one don't actually want GW to utterly fail, but the quality is looking patchy so far.

For a positive review of Finecast, check out Doghouse's thread here: linky-dink!

Those didn't look too bad, but the pics could have been better, lol.

I'll be presenting the Commissar Calgar review of the 'Finecost' Ork Shokk Attack Gun later on...

htj wrote:So many miscasts! This is really concerning. I don't want to be wasting my time replacing parts, and filling holes on miniatures that I'm already paying a premium for.

What Kilkrazy said, surely there must be some people who've bought some Finecasts without flaws?

Not one bought at the GW Cairns today could be shown without flaws.

The display items in the window were clearly the "best" they could find, and even those were not flawless.

To be honest, the new resin hybrid seems to be taking the assembly to new skill levels while the sprues themselves seem to make the initial clipping and cleaning mroe painful.

Gamers and hobbyists should now be asking themselves:

"Are these premium prices really worth my time?"