| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
2015/09/05 16:09:53
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Was poking around some toy archive websites and found this:    That's a very early prototype for an Ork Boy action figure. Still digging around for more information, but the aesthetics definitely place it in the early 90's era.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/05 16:10:32
|
|
|
 |
|
2015/09/05 16:34:56
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Confessor Of Sins
WA, USA
|
Okay...and your source and evidence on this? I don't see any GW marks and it wouldn't make much sense.
|
 Ouze wrote:
Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 16:42:29
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Found it at Virtual Toy Chest. As I said, still digging around for more info on this, including contacting VTC to find out how the obtained it. Most likely it would have been licensed out back then rather than produced by GW themselves.
The styling and sculpting is very reminiscent of Playmates' 80's/90's TMNT figures.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/05 16:46:14
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 16:46:15
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Confessor Of Sins
WA, USA
|
But the face is very reminiscent of stuff from cartoons of the time.
Among many others. I don't see anything that is distinctly GW in it. But that is just a lot of unanswered questions.
|
Ouze wrote:
Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 16:50:38
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Feel free not to believe it. I'm just sharing something I found based on the information given. http://www.virtualtoychest.com/w/warhammer40k/warhammer40k.html
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/05 16:51:24
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 17:39:11
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
I still consider GW products toys  ( I actually consider all my hobby products toys  )
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/05 17:39:33
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 17:50:04
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Hellish Haemonculus
|
 curran12 wrote:But the face is very reminiscent of stuff from cartoons of the time.
Among many others. I don't see anything that is distinctly GW in it. But that is just a lot of unanswered questions.
I was going to like a picture of toadwart if you didn't. 
Does Virtual Toy Chest have any credibility as to the origin? Do they do research? Or can anyone just post a picture there and claim it's whatever they want?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 17:56:34
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche
|
It's always possible someone made it on spec, to pitch a line of action figures to GW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 18:09:41
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Freelance Soldier
|
GW still considers 40K toys. Or was it jewels? I forgot which.
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 18:13:05
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
 -DE- wrote:GW still considers 40K toys. Or was it jewels? I forgot which.
They aren't mutually exclusive
Actual jewels are just toys for the ladies 
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/05 19:09:24
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
 Talys wrote: -DE- wrote:GW still considers 40K toys. Or was it jewels? I forgot which.
They aren't mutually exclusive
Actual jewels are just toys for the ladies
Not just the ladies; I spend a fair amount of time playing with my jewels, too.
|
Mandorallen turned back toward the insolently sneering baron. 'My Lord,' The great knight said distantly, 'I find thy face apelike and thy form misshapen. Thy beard, moreover, is an offence against decency, resembling more closely the scabrous fur which doth decorate the hinder portion of a mongrel dog than a proper adornment for a human face. Is it possibly that thy mother, seized by some wild lechery, did dally at some time past with a randy goat?' - Mimbrate Knight Protector Mandorallen.
Excerpt from "Seeress of Kell", Book Five of The Malloreon series by David Eddings.
My deviantART Profile - Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Madness
"You need not fear us, unless you are a dark heart, a vile one who preys on the innocent; I promise, you can’t hide forever in the empty darkness, for we will hunt you down like the animals you are, and pull you into the very bowels of hell." Iron - Within Temptation |
|
|
|
|
2015/09/06 00:34:24
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
 Avatar 720 wrote:
Not just the ladies; I spend a fair amount of time playing with my jewels, too.
Hmmm... I better stay away from that one
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/06 12:03:00
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Fixture of Dakka
|
 Jimsolo wrote: curran12 wrote:But the face is very reminiscent of stuff from cartoons of the time.
Among many others. I don't see anything that is distinctly GW in it. But that is just a lot of unanswered questions.
I was going to like a picture of toadwart if you didn't.
Does Virtual Toy Chest have any credibility as to the origin? Do they do research? Or can anyone just post a picture there and claim it's whatever they want?
Its the internet.
Everyone's an expert.
Zero cred and this site is seriously wack.  As for the toys, there are a couple of pretty ... good to awful action figures for orks. All they need are the oversized machineguns/ rocket launchers from the soldiers of the True Heroes line.
The figures are craptastic, but there are quite a few of them. ( You could have some Eldar, as well...)
Somewhere someplace, there's somebody hordeing this stuff..... pun intended.
|
At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money. |
|
|
|
|
2015/09/06 15:13:02
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Wrathful Warlord Titan Commander
|
Seriously wack?
That's wiggerdy-wack jack an' I ain't goin' back.
90s talk for 90s toy.
|
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website " |
|
|
|
|
2015/09/06 16:20:06
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Nervous Accuser
South Carolina
|
Working at a comic book store back in the 90s, I swear I remember something about GW working in an action figure line. Can't remember if it was something they sent out or something in a chessex flyer. Never saw anything else about it.
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/06 22:04:55
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Talys wrote:I still consider GW products toys
( I actually consider all my hobby products toys )
Pretty much. Extremely detailed toys that aren't for kids.
|
|
|
|
|
2015/09/08 03:12:07
Subject: Apparently, GW once considered 40K toys
|
|
Dakka Veteran
|
When Citadel started to move into plastics it experimented with larger scale toys using the experience of some employees pulled from Matchbox. Couldn't view the pics you posted, but it could be related to that.
You can read more about it in the Bryan Ansell interview with OldHammer.
http://realmofchaos80s.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/return-of-mighty-avenger-second.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
