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.

 blood reaper wrote:
Is it me or are the sculpts released by GW for the Hobbit recently have gone down in quality? I mean, look at Golem;



That, or it's just the paint job. When was Golem, erm, that colour?

Yes, paint job is very sloppy. I could have painted that mini

Is his hand one solid piece? I guess trying to show webbing? No gaps between the fingers from what I can see

Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

 stubacca wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

It did Ok in the cinema,

but it was not the Huge media hit that LoTR was,

it didn't get the 'vanilla' magazine, newspaper, TV, radio coverage that the original trilogy did,

and it's this extra coverage that drew folk who normally would not by tie in stuff to purchace a whole raft of junk/cool stuff including GWs LoTR stuff (unlike the Hobbit stuff)

silent25 wrote:

 stubacca wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Doesn't help the fact that almost nobody is aware, that a Hobbit tabletop game exists.
Not even White Dwarf thinks it is worth an article beside the standard one page per product in the news section, as if they are ashamed.

 Goliath wrote:

silent25 wrote:


Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

If that is the case, then that makes GW's failure to convert those ticket sales into unit sales of the game an even bigger issue. Although you could argue that there was something less of a 'buzz' about the Hobbit movie, just on the grounds that it wasn't anything new in the way that the first trilogy were, although again that would have to be a subjective statement on my part.

(OT - I thought I'd read that Skyfall was the biggest grossing film in the UK of all time? Or is this including international figures?)

Yeah, it's the highest grossing film of all time in the UK, but worldwide it's only seventh, presumably due to how "british" Bond is.

On topic, the fact that it did so well does seem to make it worse on GW's part, but to be fair they were screwed over a fair bit by New Line changing to three films and altering who would have been revealed by the "first" film.

So even though millions of people went out and saw the film, the models available in many cases aren't from the film they went and saw, as the models were made for a larger film.

 Goliath wrote:

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Think you need to adjust for inflation. There are movies that made far more in relative ticket sales. And as I said, even if it was "successful", doesn't mean it wasn't a failure in the eyes of the studios. There are plenty of movies that were "#1" at the theater upon release, but are still considered a failure.

The Hobbit cost $250 million to make. That is a 20% return. I believe the studios expected far more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you want to see what the highest grossing film ever was:
Gone With the Wind

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Think you need to adjust for inflation. There are movies that made far more in relative ticket sales. And as I said, even if it was "successful", doesn't mean it wasn't a failure in the eyes of the studios. There are plenty of movies that were "#1" at the theater upon release, but are still considered a failure.

The Hobbit cost $250 million to make. That is a 20% return. I believe the studios expected far more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you want to see what the highest grossing film ever was:
Gone With the Wind

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

 Sigvatr wrote:
And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

There's nothing wrong with his hand. It is, as the GW newsletter is quick to tell us, sculpted from their "premium resin". So it's obviously perfect, and any fault we find is our own!


Unless of course when they say "premium" they just mean the price...

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

Still there are plenty of movies on that list I that I look at and think, people actually spent money and time on that garbage?

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

There are a lot of people who would say GW provide the best overall product.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

There are a lot of people who would say GW provide the best overall product.

An annoyingly large number of those people haven't actually played other games or bought the models.

The real measure of how successful the Hobbit was, will be how many people go the second film.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Now on preorder:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCatsLarge.jsp?catId=cat970003a&rootCatGameStyle=athletic

Captain of Erebor:


Captain of Dale


Thrain


Gollum with Fish


Gandalf and Bilbo Baggins:

The Captain of Erebor is great, the Captain of Dale is mech, everything else is passable. Why release yet another version of Galdalf and Bilbo when they have yet to release Radagast and his sled?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Welp, that's it: my life is now complete. I have now seen the Gollum with a fish model, and my final check has been placed on my bucketlist. Come get me, North Korean bombs. My life's crowning moment has been met.

LOL

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Thror is perhaps my favorite dwarf GW has ever created. He really sells the kingliness angle.

I was really down for buying the Thror model. I forgot to check the WD for prices, and I raced down to my local GW store to check him out. Then i saw the price tag - TWENTY BUCKS?! For a tiny half-size model?! He's a very cool figure, but I put him back with the ninja quickness.

I think the prices are really too much. My local GW store still has tons of the LE starter.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

Just watched shipping wars. Gullom looks like the red base ball player red statue, that one of the shippers had to move. LOL.

Just wish I could remember the names, sorry.

Wasn't there another Gollum with fish model?

Found it!

The link of highest grossing films adjusted for inflation is counting multiple theatrical releases for a lot of the old films (which is why so many are at the very top).

The Hobbit movie did a heck of a lot better than the game is doing, and as Kroothawk says, the fact that GW didn't / isn't marketing it anywhere certainly contributes to that. There's plenty of Hobbit paraphernalia in the bookstores around here, and I think it has pride of place because it sells. Those people don't know anything about GW's figures, though, because they're only advertised where gamers would see them. And most gamers saw what happened with LOTR and won't be biting again...

In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Sounds [unenthusiastic]fun[/unenthusiastic].

It would be nice if they could put out anything that is both a half decent model and at a reasonable price.

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Christ, 40€...that's a bit...high....

 cincydooley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Christ, 40€...that's a bit...high....

welcome to the world of GamesWorkshop, lad...

Just a question: how much are Warriors of Rohan right now on the GW website (for some reason it says Site Temporarily Unavailable whenever I try to access the GW website here in the Philippines)? I have bought a box of 24 in my FLGS for Php 1550, so that's around $37-38. If I remember correctly they have stopped selling boxes of 24, right? So what I got must be some old stock.

12 for 24.75 US-$.

they come in like boxes of 12 for about $30

enjoy

So that means I "saved" some cash by buying old stock? Nice.

In comparison, the Fellowship of the Ring plastics are Php 2250 (around $55). For 9 plastic figures. While it's $38 for 24 plastic figures. THAT'S INSANE.