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.

At least there's bitz potential with that cigar in my opinion.

Hmm, just seen the new ogryns, bit underwhelmed by them to be honest, could be the paint job though, I like my miniatures looking well worn and weathered and they're just too shiny to me, I do like the rebreather head though and the ripperguns

The armour looks like its separate to the vest wearing torso, I mean it looks like it's a separate component that would fit over the ogryn body like a real breastplate, anyone else think this? Which would be pretty cool I suppose (except for the tank tread loincloth, I'd be cutting that right off)

 Bull0 wrote:
Like them a damn sight more than any previous attempts at Ogryns, that's for sure. As others have said, the choices of colour scheme really do the models no favours. The 'cool' thing to do is condemn the models based on a few washed out magazine shots but I'm probably going to hold off on judging, myself...

Oh, do come on! Like them if you like them, but these are clear, well lit, focused shots of the magazine (so, one would logically assume, designed to make them look as good as possible) not the same quality that appeared last week of the Taurox.

I agree the paint scheme is poor, but I think the heads are the worst aspect, so compatibility with Ogre kits might save them (although, again, having to buy more bits and spend more time in order to 'fix' an offering from the self proclaimed greatest maker of toy soldiers in the world is a whole discussion in itself) but as they stand, they actually make me less inclined to collect IG than previously.

Ogryns are shockingly bad IMO, apart from the first one but only because he looks like Sloth from The Goonies.

These Ogryns have a lot of potential. I think I will GS some chain mail onto the bullygryns and add extra armour and to the normal Ogryns. Also a cut down chain sword will go a long way to beefing up the bayonet

 azreal13 wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Like them a damn sight more than any previous attempts at Ogryns, that's for sure. As others have said, the choices of colour scheme really do the models no favours. The 'cool' thing to do is condemn the models based on a few washed out magazine shots but I'm probably going to hold off on judging, myself...

Oh, do come on! Like them if you like them, but these are clear, well lit, focused shots of the magazine (so, one would logically assume, designed to make them look as good as possible) not the same quality that appeared last week of the Taurox.

I agree the paint scheme is poor, but I think the heads are the worst aspect, so compatibility with Ogre kits might save them (although, again, having to buy more bits and spend more time in order to 'fix' an offering from the self proclaimed greatest maker of toy soldiers in the world is a whole discussion in itself) but as they stand, they actually make me less inclined to collect IG than previously.

Comparing how badly I considered Centurions based on GWs promo pics to how much I liked them once I saw them painted and on the table, I think that it's reasonable to disregard GWs promo pics entirely. For some reason, they have a knack for presenting their products in as unappealing alight as possible.

Yep, the photos are in focus, but they're grainy and washed out by virtue of being phone camera pictures. Also, you can actually see the page is bent in one of them, so the shape of the models may even be moderately distorted. Definitely doesn't present the models in "as good a way as possible". You can also only see 4 possible builds out of what is, presumably, a big multi-part kit. So, yeah, reserving judgement is still the way I'm choosing to play this.

I don't really like the heads either, to be fair, but I do like them more than any previous incarnations, which is all I said.

This line is a bit troubling:

azreal13 wrote:compatibility with Ogre kits might save them (although, again, having to buy more bits and spend more time in order to 'fix' an offering from the self proclaimed greatest maker of toy soldiers in the world is a whole discussion in itself)

That kind of reads like you aren't judging the models on their merit alone.

 tomjoad wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
Like them a damn sight more than any previous attempts at Ogryns, that's for sure. As others have said, the choices of colour scheme really do the models no favours. The 'cool' thing to do is condemn the models based on a few washed out magazine shots but I'm probably going to hold off on judging, myself...

Oh, do come on! Like them if you like them, but these are clear, well lit, focused shots of the magazine (so, one would logically assume, designed to make them look as good as possible) not the same quality that appeared last week of the Taurox.

I agree the paint scheme is poor, but I think the heads are the worst aspect, so compatibility with Ogre kits might save them (although, again, having to buy more bits and spend more time in order to 'fix' an offering from the self proclaimed greatest maker of toy soldiers in the world is a whole discussion in itself) but as they stand, they actually make me less inclined to collect IG than previously.

Comparing how badly I considered Centurions based on GWs promo pics to how much I liked them once I saw them painted and on the table, I think that it's reasonable to disregard GWs promo pics entirely. For some reason, they have a knack for presenting their products in as unappealing alight as possible.

I totally agree, my tongue was certainly headed cheekward when I wrote that part of the post, as GW, somehow, seem happy to use gak pictures of gak paint jobs to promote their models.

It all feeds back into the attitude of "they'll buy what we make, we don't make what they'll buy" that seems to be their MO. They don't feel pressure to sell to their customers, they're arrogant enough to assume people will buy it regardless. It distresses me that they're largely correct, and I sincerely hope that the recent financial drop is a symptom of the customers finally wising up and will force them to put some hard yards in, rather than some more spurious economic reasoning.

I'm just gonna hope they are way cooler than these pictures make them look.

 Bull0 wrote:

This line is a bit troubling:

azreal13 wrote:compatibility with Ogre kits might save them (although, again, having to buy more bits and spend more time in order to 'fix' an offering from the self proclaimed greatest maker of toy soldiers in the world is a whole discussion in itself)

That kind of reads like you aren't judging the models on their merit alone.

Where is it written I have to judge them on merit alone? I'll arrive at my opinion any damn way I choose.

As it happens, I think these are terrible, I would always think they were terrible, but at least if they were some offering from a small studio or novice sculptor it would mitigate their apparent terribadness somewhat. But they aren't, they are from a company who openly claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world.

These are not them.

So although you were slagging the models off because they're a GW product and you take exception to GW's self-promotion, you weren't actually doing that, you just don't like the models. Fair enough!

I like the current Ogryns a lot more than these new ones (except the one guy with the gas mask, that looks cool). All I can think of looking at them is a goonies-esque "HEY YOU GUUUUUYS!".

The new Hydra also looks rather lame, like they Lego'd the current Hydra, and I'm really hoping its not Open Topped.

Not keen on the open topped Hydra. It limits those folk with non cadian regiments.

timd wrote:

 -iPaint- wrote:

Ogryns are laughably bad. They're taking the grim-dark out of 40k....
~iPaint

and replacing it with grim-dork...

 Alpharius wrote:
I liked this style of Ogryn:



but as mentioned, it was more than a little "Ogre in Space".

These news ones are...disappointing.

Ugh, agreed on both counts! Those old school models are sweet... the new ones, not so much.

 pretre wrote:
Also, I love the electronic commissar on the Bone 'ead's shoulder.

That bit actually made me smile; "You do what da metalmouf sez ya lummox, it 'as the proper 'at on it an' everyfink! *smack*"

I think the kit is a bit hit&miss, some of the parts are great, some look a bit derpy, a few look truly stupid, but they've gone with yet another "Baby's First Warhammer" paintjob so I'm hoping they will improve to "brilliant, pretty good, wee bit derpy" when we more pics. The scale will be important too, if they're on 30 or 40mm bases they'll be much less ridiculous than if they're on 50's. What is up with the legs though? Square knees and hard angles on fabric...yeugh.

Bit surprised to find so many fans of the older metal ogryns, I always thought their faces looked like mugshots of paedophiles, only with tusks.

 Ir0njack wrote:

Also the colors are just garish and it makes the model look much worse than it is IMO.

Shades of the red and green paint jobs of the 2nd edition era!

T

I loathed the original metals personally. Though I might still have some in my basement....

I still like the RT-era Ogryns by Bob Olley. Not crazy about these guys, but I think a lot of that is the painting.

Yeah, the armor is too gaudy. I guess they were going for a sort of futuristic-blue-steel look, but the blue is just a wee too bright for that model.

Tanks treads for armour? What are thet orks? So stupid.

The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

The mustachioed head is the most gooftastic.

Ogryns that shave? And that shave that precisely?

 Alpharius wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

The mustachioed head is the most gooftastic.

Ogryns that shave? And that shave that precisely?

They just use a Las-Gun

 Alpharius wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

The mustachioed head is the most gooftastic.

Ogryns that shave? And that shave that precisely?

Maybe the regimental barber shaves them?

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

The mustachioed head is the most gooftastic.

Ogryns that shave? And that shave that precisely?

They just use a Las-Gun

Nah, it's shaved during the battle.
Getting shot in the face tends to be bad for facial hair.

 Alpharius wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

Nope. The sculpting quality is clearly superior. This is craft, not art. You may not like the concept these are sculpted from or the design choices, which are certainly subjective, but the technical sculpting is more than solid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, maybe that's just nose hair. We're jumping to too many conclusions here.

 RiTides wrote:

timd wrote:

 -iPaint- wrote:

Ogryns are laughably bad. They're taking the grim-dark out of 40k....
~iPaint

and replacing it with grim-dork...

 Alpharius wrote:
I liked this style of Ogryn:



but as mentioned, it was more than a little "Ogre in Space".

These news ones are...disappointing.

Ugh, agreed on both counts! Those old school models are sweet... the new ones, not so much.

Aw come on, guys. Isn't that a little bit of nostalgia at play? Aren't the ridiculous faces and comic book style bandages rather silly and tongue in cheek on these 90's Ogryn? I am seeing more of a Judge Dredd vibe with these models than anything Grimdark. My point is if GW came out with the 90's Ogryn today, I doubt they would be well received. I mean the bandages alone are hilarious!

I have to say, the newest ones have better faces for conveying the cerebral limitations Ogryn are known for. They look like they were descended from humans and now wear their pants on their heads--which I like infinitely better than those cartoony 90'sOgryn.

 plastictrees wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
The moustached head is probably a Vostroyan wannabe Ogryn.

Still really liking these. Clearly superior sculptsto anything we've had before. They're going to look brutal with the right paint job, not that this is bad paint, GW just don't do 'gritty' studio work.

With "Clearly" being clearly subjective here!

Nope. The sculpting quality is clearly superior. This is craft, not art. You may not like the concept these are sculpted from or the design choices, which are certainly subjective, but the technical sculpting is more than solid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, maybe that's just nose hair. We're jumping to too many conclusions here.

That's some well groomed nose hair then

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:

Also, maybe that's just nose hair. We're jumping to too many conclusions here.

That's some well groomed nose hair then

He just eats the hair that gets too close to his mouth. It all fits. My theory is seamless.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Tanks treads for armour? What are thet orks? So stupid.

Makeshift armor plate? How dare they!