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.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The success of Space Hulk has to be contrasted with the failure of Dreadfleet.

The reasons for Dreadfleets failure are plain. Blood Bowl should do at least as well as Space Hulk but I am sure that it will be another limited release which is then never spoken of again. If nothing else it will make the Ebay scalpers happy.

I genuinely don't understand why GW no longer make stand alone boxed games, they were obviously successful in the past and they have a strong relationship with FFG which would allow them to sidestep the issues they have with MB over the rights to Heroquest and Space Crusade.

Exactly.

I would like GW to stock boxed games, not just the occasional retread of an old classic but new titles based in their existing IP and in different but related areas.

Any concern over the ability to produce such games well would be met by licensing out the design side to FFG.

The Hobbit: What Went Wrong?

The prices mainly.

And (some) of the models...

RoninXiC wrote:
And (some) of the models...

Hey, don't you diss brilliant models like;



And;

 blood reaper wrote:

RoninXiC wrote:
And (some) of the models...

Hey, don't you diss brilliant models like;



And;

Is that a failcrap bubble I see in Gollum's arm?

Some friends and I were really looking forward to the Hobbit release, figured it would be our chance to jump onboard. But when it came out we found it just too pricey and we all decided we'd be better off putting our money into expanding our 40K armies. It's back to value for money, I get my value for money from my 40K, I doubt I would from LOTR.

As for GW and board games, add RPGs into that too. I can't understand why they don't at least stock their licensed products that FFG produce. Surely Relic would sell well if it were on GW shelves, and probably a lot better than just being in hidden away LGS.

PhantomViper wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

RoninXiC wrote:
And (some) of the models...

Hey, don't you diss brilliant models like;



And;

Is that a failcrap bubble I see in Gollum's arm?

Not sure if serious! How could you doubt the 'amazing', 'ground' breaking detail provided in the Golem model! That's not a bubble, it's some form of parasite, or tumour.

That version of Gollum makes me sad...
GW is capable of creating MUCH better miniatures...

It probably doesn't help that they haven't released a number of iconic characters from the film. There are three Radagast miniatures available yet none of them come with his rabbit sled and there's no Azog at all.

I wonder if purist fans of the novel are dictating model releases?

What happened to Gollum`s hand, anyway? I remember he had fingers on the movies...

You should notice that this mini looks crap painted by GW specialists. Just imagine how crappy it would look like painted by one of us, mere mortals...

And that for 20.00???!!!! Are you kidding me??!! Does anyone know a single soul that actually intends on purchasing this... Thing?

Again, it looks like GW did a terrible paint job more than the model itself is terrible. If you look at the 3D rotating model on the website you can see several lines which GW have painted as hard lines which aren't actually hard lines, continuing their idiotic philosophy of painting all models to look cartoonish, even the ones that aren't.

The hand does look a bit odd, it's a mixture of poor painting, poor camera angle (if you look at it from another angle the thumb doesn't look quite as disproportionate) and it is a bit thicker than it should be, I'm guessing because they couldn't actually make a part that small hold detail in the moulding process. They probably would have been better off making the hand hold the side of the basket, open hands are notoriously hard to make look right, especially on that scale.

As for the price, yes, that's just absurd. It's a tiny model.

PhantomViper wrote:

Is that a failcrap bubble I see in Gollum's arm?

It's the hole for the implants. Gollum's having a boob job you see.

That's totally worth $35 AUS

I'm sick of all the trash talk and negativity about this Gollum figure. It is clear that this rendition of Warrior Gollum is prepared to cut down his foes as if they were the mightiest trees in the forrest. That alone makes it a wonderful mini.

Ni.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Any concern over the ability to produce such games well would be met by licensing out the design side to FFG.

So you mean, having FFG write rules that Citadel would sell with miniatures? Because GW seems unwilling to do it the other way around, resulting in the ugly bits in FFG's HH board game and Chaos in the Old World as well as more recently the goofy busts that come with Relic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 George Spiggott wrote:
There are three Radagast miniatures available yet none of them come with his rabbit sled and there's no Azog at all.

Two excellent points -- considering the Rules Handbook contains stats for both!

If GW were clever they would look at the core competencies of both companies and use whichever was the best at the task.

Of course, it's possible that GW have examined core competencies, and concluded that FFG are better at rules, components and models (for boardgames). I mean, FFG are actually pretty good at all that stuff.

Even so, GW could still stock FFG games based on Warhammer type backgrounds, if they wanted to put more different lines in their shops.

I don't think players care who made the game as long as it is a good game.

I started playing the LOTR game when I picked up the DeAgostino mag from Tesco that I'd seen advertised on the TV.

The magazine came out once a fortnight ( I think) and came with a sprue or metal sculpt, a scenario to play with your new minis and cardboard sculpts to take the place of the pieces you didn't have. This magazine also has an article to paint your new minis and an article to build terrain.

None of this has happened this time out so there is no way to attract a potential gamer like myself. I did dabble in 40k and warhammer when I was younger off the back of Heroquest and another game I forget the name of (battlemasters?) but it was these mags that sucked me back in.

As a point, how good would White Dwarf be if it followed the rules of the DeAgostino mags. Imagine this month's Tau release with a sprue of Firewarriors attached and a terrain making article for Tau terrain.

Silver_skates wrote:
I started playing the LOTR game when I picked up the DeAgostino mag from Tesco that I'd seen advertised on the TV.

The magazine came out once a fortnight ( I think) and came with a sprue or metal sculpt, a scenario to play with your new minis and cardboard sculpts to take the place of the pieces you didn't have. This magazine also has an article to paint your new minis and an article to build terrain.

None of this has happened this time out so there is no way to attract a potential gamer like myself. I did dabble in 40k and warhammer when I was younger off the back of Heroquest and another game I forget the name of (battlemasters?) but it was these mags that sucked me back in.

As a point, how good would White Dwarf be if it followed the rules of the DeAgostino mags. Imagine this month's Tau release with a sprue of Firewarriors attached and a terrain making article for Tau terrain.

Unfortunately that's a fantastic idea, and we know how much GW loves those. Heck it's not like they don't already have the resources for including a snap-fit mini once a while, it's a great way of promoting the tactile nature of the hobby. It's a shame GW's convinced their models are worth their weight in gold.

Heres my take, just my opinion. The Tolkien series just doesnt inspire me as a game. The books are classics, the movies so far (including The Hobbit) are great. However, they just dont make me want to rush to the gaming table. I guess I just like them better as stories.

 Mad4Minis wrote:
Heres my take, just my opinion. The Tolkien series just doesnt inspire me as a game. The books are classics, the movies so far (including The Hobbit) are great. However, they just dont make me want to rush to the gaming table. I guess I just like them better as stories.

I actually found that the movies especially were great for convincing me to start a LotR army. The large battle scenes were so awe inspiring. I was incredibly close to starting an Isengard army but GW doubled the price of all the infantry kits (well, halved the amount in the kit anyway) before I could actually buy some.

In that way I think that the lack of real huge battle scenes in the first Hobbit movie probably didn't do GW any favours. Of course, the real reason the stuff doesn't sell that well is because they don't advertise it nearly enough and the huge leap in price from the original LotR sets.