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 problems that I have with it in general are many, but most boils down to the arrogant, snobby tone that GW seems to have in regards to everything. The game is secondary, but they charge more than anyone else for rules and have more extra rules (supplements, dataslates, FW rules etc) than everybody. That alone indicates that they're lying when they say the game is a secondary concern, because they seem to put a lot of effort into products that a real collector isn't going to care about. I talk to someone who is a real collector: He buys figures (typically the large ones) that he likes, but he doesn't know anything about the game and doesn't care because he doesn't play, he likes to paint them. He isn't going to buy multiples of things, he's going to buy maybe one and that's it, because the rules don't matter to him.
Yet GW pushes rules and the idea that you're building a "collection" that can see play. There's a fundamental disconnect there I think. A real model company isn't going to charge a boatload for rules that are a small concern, let alone make a big deal about them being hardcover, full color and glossy pages. They would have large fluff type books with maps and imagery and the like for collector's, but not rule books.
WayneTheGame wrote: The problems that I have with it in general are many, but most boils down to the arrogant, snobby tone that GW seems to have in regards to everything. The game is secondary, but they charge more than anyone else for rules and have more extra rules (supplements, dataslates, FW rules etc) than everybody. That alone indicates that they're lying when they say the game is a secondary concern, because they seem to put a lot of effort into products that a real collector isn't going to care about. I talk to someone who is a real collector: He buys figures (typically the large ones) that he likes, but he doesn't know anything about the game and doesn't care because he doesn't play, he likes to paint them. He isn't going to buy multiples of things, he's going to buy maybe one and that's it, because the rules don't matter to him.
Yet GW pushes rules and the idea that you're building a "collection" that can see play. There's a fundamental disconnect there I think. A real model company isn't going to charge a boatload for rules that are a small concern, let alone make a big deal about them being hardcover, full color and glossy pages. They would have large fluff type books with maps and imagery and the like for collector's, but not rule books.
They're getting people who "collect" the purpose of playing a game, or at least the idea of playing a game with all of the miniatures at some point down the road. It doesn't matter if they get there, it's all about the dream of having a well-put together army and putting it through its paces. If that game becomes unattainably expensive or seen as something that most people don't enjoy, people stop collecting because the goal is lost.
There are of course those who buy a few miniatures as you mentioned, but they amount of purchasing they do is much lower because there's no *necessity* to making purchases. And then you have a few people who just buy outrageous numbers of models, but I think that's just because money is no object for them
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 15:10:52
2015/03/03 15:19:07
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
Deadnight wrote: @jah Joshua: regarding 'alternative' space marines, how do you rate anvil industry's black ops 'so not space marines' Exo lords? Just curious, mind.
I'd love to have an army of these guys. so much character.
personally, i don't rate them at all as 40K Space Marines...
i do not use 3rd-party products in my personal 40K projects...
i use GW (which includes Forge World) miniatures for my personal 40K projects, because that is the look that i like (and for a very important reason discussed below)...
as stand-alone powered armor warriors, the Exo Lords don't look bad...
they never made me reach for my money, though...
my respect for Anvil Industries skyrocketed the moment that Afterlife was announced...
since he is now creating his own IP, i have much more regard for the company...
his sculpting just keeps getting better, too...
i may even buy some of the new minis that are created for his game, but i would paint them according to the background of the Afterlife setting, not as a "not 40K" stand-in...
on the other hand, i would not buy any "not 40K" products from companies like Kromlech, Puppet's War, or Chapterhouse...
supporting 3rd-party products is just not my thing...
i know this is a touchy subject here, and i will probably catch a lot of flak for my opinion, but i just don't have any desire to purchase 3rd-party products for use in my personal 40K or WFB projects...
if i am painting up a personal project, i don't want to mix manufacturers...
i want my buyer to be able to walk into a GW store, and show off his purchase, without having to worry about getting flak from the manager about a mini that used non-GW parts...
since all of my personal projects are for sale, that just makes good business sense to me...
what others choose to do is none of my business, and what others hire me to paint is their choice...
for example, one of my customers has just hired me to paint a Chaos Space Marine set for his Black Crusade gaming group...
as far as i can recall, this will be my first time ever painting both 3rd-party sculpts and a "counts-as" mini...
i will be using a mix of the Russian Thousand Sons torso set to build a Sorcerer and a Rubric Marine, using GW parts for the rest of the build...
three other characters will be all GW and FW parts, while the last mini will be a converted Infinity model to represent a female Heretek (which GW does not produce an actual model for)...
i have no problem painting up these models as the customer wants them, since it's his call...
cheers
jah
While reading through this thread - you are a rarity
You would be GW's ideal customer in every way. There aren't many of you that follow what you preach. You're a rare breed - but one that is good for the hobby (I checked out your gallery, your work is amazing).
also - I've met a single local guy who never paints or plays. He only builds Ultramarines. He's on his 3rd or 4th Company. He just likes to build and prime them blue, tens of thousands of points. He's never played a game that we know of. The old local GW store loved the guy - because he fits the bill of what they want.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 15:19:58
notprop wrote: Or after 8 editions it's still outselling everything else, it cant be too bad now can it?
Have you not been paying attention to the financial reports?
Also, the comment's been made that over the past few years, Dakka has changed. They called it "toxic" but what they meant was "there's a lot of criticism." If the criticism is increasing, isn't that a symptom of something far more serious?
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
lord_blackfang wrote: Hmm, who was it that said that GW's long term plan was to have 1 customer and sell him 1 box of Marines per year for 150 million?
Kirby?
In many ways it has seemed to me that WH40K hit its peaks in 3rd and 5th editions - though I prefer 3rd.
2nd was a lot of fun, and changed a lot over its years, and was pretty much the edition that introduced most of the players that I know to the setting.
2nd also seemed the heyday for fanzines and fan involvement - with GW communicating with the community, and even having fan content magazines. I really miss those days.
The game rules themselves were not as good as 3rd edition - but, damn, we had fun.
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
notprop wrote: Or after 8 editions it's still outselling everything else, it cant be too bad now can it?
Have you not been paying attention to the financial reports?
Also, the comment's been made that over the past few years, Dakka has changed. They called it "toxic" but what they meant was "there's a lot of criticism." If the criticism is increasing, isn't that a symptom of something far more serious?
Yes, it shows that GW while reducing in turnover still outstrips PP (for example) approximately 10 to 1 (based upon an estimated TO of £15M that was rumoured before) or Battlefront/Warlord by greater margins.
Now your rather curt message does underline the point I was making, thank you for falling into my little heffalump trap.
All I have done is post a mirror of the post before mine highlighting that whatever your opinion of GW or indeed WH40K it is still massively popular. Neither pro nor anti GW.
For your part you have jumped on the offensive to quash any defence of the "Evil Empire", even though there was not such connotation in my post. You're not criticising GW you're criticising posters that (you perceive) have the temerity to defend GW. Even if I had been defending GW (White Knight style) it still wouldn't excuse it.
So to paraphrase I see posts like this and see it as the equivalent of "You like GW so you smell", it's puerile and yes a bit toxic and all too common.
I think that there is more of this sort of behaviour on Dakka than before, I think it devalues the community and quality of discussion. I stand by the statement.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 16:18:23
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website "
notprop wrote: Or after 8 editions it's still outselling everything else, it cant be too bad now can it?
Have you not been paying attention to the financial reports?
Also, the comment's been made that over the past few years, Dakka has changed. They called it "toxic" but what they meant was "there's a lot of criticism." If the criticism is increasing, isn't that a symptom of something far more serious?
Yes, it shows that GW while reducing in turnover still outstrips PP (for example) approximately 10 to 1 (based upon an estimated TO of £15M that was rumoured before) or Battlefront/Warlord by greater margins.
Now your rather curt message does underline the point I was making, thank you for falling into my little heffalump trap.
All I have done is post a mirror of the post before mine highlighting that whatever your opinion of GW or indeed WH40K it is still massively popular. Neither pro nor anti GW.
For your part you have jumped on the offensive to quash any defence of the "Evil Empire", even though there was not such connotation in my post. You're not criticising GW you're criticising posters that (you perceive) have the temerity to defend GW. Even if I had been defending GW (White Knight style) it still wouldn't excuse it.
So to paraphrase I see posts like this and see it as the equivalent of "You like GW so you smell", it's puerile and yes a bit toxic and all too common.
I think that there is more of this sort of behaviour on Dakka than before, I think it devalues the community and quality of discussion. I stand by the statement.
You're reading things into my post that I've never said or intended. How is "increase of criticisms = something wrong with GW" as an attack against pro-GW posters?
You're having a knee-jerk reaction to a criticsm to a game you love.
As for my first statement about the financials, I wasn't talking in terms of absolute profit, but in terms of growth vs decline. PP is growing leaps and bounds and GW is shrinking by the year.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
You're having a knee-jerk reaction to a criticsm to a game you love.
You are being churlish now, but again you make my point.
Nothing about love or even preference in my post chum? I don't even have those little Space Marine dollies in my sig like you....?
Your having a good old dig now, probably in the belief that its GW fault or something, but in fact you are just being a bit rude to another poster for little reason.
As for my first statement about the financials, I wasn't talking in terms of absolute profit, but in terms of growth vs decline. PP is growing leaps and bounds and GW is shrinking by the year.
Then say what you mean. Getting less over excited may help you in that regard.
There are no figures published for PP, so that is conjecture. That's not to say that it isn't the case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 16:41:24
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website "
notprop wrote: Or after 8 editions it's still outselling everything else, it cant be too bad now can it?
Have you not been paying attention to the financial reports?
Also, the comment's been made that over the past few years, Dakka has changed. They called it "toxic" but what they meant was "there's a lot of criticism." If the criticism is increasing, isn't that a symptom of something far more serious?
Yes, it shows that GW while reducing in turnover still outstrips PP (for example) approximately 10 to 1 (based upon an estimated TO of £15M that was rumoured before) or Battlefront/Warlord by greater margins.
Now your rather curt message does underline the point I was making, thank you for falling into my little heffalump trap.
All I have done is post a mirror of the post before mine highlighting that whatever your opinion of GW or indeed WH40K it is still massively popular. Neither pro nor anti GW.
For your part you have jumped on the offensive to quash any defence of the "Evil Empire", even though there was not such connotation in my post. You're not criticising GW you're criticising posters that (you perceive) have the temerity to defend GW. Even if I had been defending GW (White Knight style) it still wouldn't excuse it.
So to paraphrase I see posts like this and see it as the equivalent of "You like GW so you smell", it's puerile and yes a bit toxic and all too common.
I think that there is more of this sort of behaviour on Dakka than before, I think it devalues the community and quality of discussion. I stand by the statement.
So, what you're saying, in essence, is that you posted an opinion and someone who felt differently to the opinion you posted expressed their disagreement?
That's kinda how this whole Internet forum thing works.
If there's a lot of countering to positive statements about GW, then surely you can see that that isn't a problem, it is a symptom of a problem?
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Yes, it shows that GW while reducing in turnover still outstrips PP (for example) approximately 10 to 1 (based upon an estimated TO of £15M that was rumoured before) or Battlefront/Warlord by greater margins.
For now.
5 years ago it was probably 20 to 1, in 5 years time what will it be then? How does GW compare against the combined market share of Battlefront, PP, Mantic, Hawk, Spartan Games, Prodos...........?
GW is collapsing, that much is clear from their financial statements, panicked business decisions and the multitude of anecdotal reports of a globally declining population of GW gamers. They may be the biggest, albeit shrinking, fish but the pond has not only gotten bigger it has also gotten a lot more crowded.
Personally what has made me lose nearly all interest in GW's products is not the prices, nor even their questionable legal ethics but the appalling state of their rules, their insistence on producing childishly 'cool' models but most damning of all is their complete disregard for their own fluff. The only GW related products that I will even consider buying now are FFG's RPGs and possibly some of the PC games (at least the ones that aren't shovelware).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 17:52:26
Yes, it shows that GW while reducing in turnover still outstrips PP (for example) approximately 10 to 1 (based upon an estimated TO of £15M that was rumoured before) or Battlefront/Warlord by greater margins.
For now.
5 years ago it was probably 20 to 1, in 5 years time what will it be then? How does GW compare against the combined market share of Battlefront, PP, Mantic, Hawk, Spartan Games, Prodos...........?.
This is a very valid point. GW seem to be adamant that it's them vs everyone else (even it's customers it seems sometimes) but everyone else combined is bigger than GW.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
And as much of a ardent PP supporter as I am (bet you lot hadn't figured it out yet ), I sincerely hope that PP never reaches the prominence and market share that GW has / had.
The current state of the hobby with its myriad companies and games is much more interesting for me than the virtual monopoly that existed 10 years ago.
2015/03/03 18:03:50
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
PhantomViper wrote: And as much of a ardent PP supporter as I am (bet you lot hadn't figured it out yet ), I sincerely hope that PP never reaches the prominence and market share that GW has / had.
The current state of the hobby with its myriad companies and games is much more interesting for me than the virtual monopoly that existed 10 years ago.
Fully agreed. I don't want a hegemony in war gaming.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2015/03/03 18:04:01
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
If you are OK with GW plc raising prices over the rate of inflation year after year to adjust for falling sales volumes.
And you are not bothered about the quality of the rules GW plc want to sell,
Eg A 'GW Collector'.You are the customers GW plc want.
However, how confident are the collectors ,there are enough people with this mind set to keep GW plc going for as long as they want them to be there?
Do collectors care enough about the long term future of GW plc?
Or will they simply collect something else when GW fails to stay in business or their value for money range?
A lot of the people who buy GW product to play games with, are expressing concerns for the long term future of GW plc and the game they currently produce.
As they feel without the added value a good rule set provides , GW plc will not be able to sustain itself long term without the game playing customers.
Expressing concern over the long term future of GW plc is hardly being negative is it?
Hand waving away the issues customers have with the way GW plc does business is hardly being positive is it?
How messed up is GW plc, when the people who want it to succeed long term are thought to be attacking it.
And those who are completely indifferent to its long term future are thought to be supporting it.
Just a thought....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 18:07:50
2015/03/03 19:22:05
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
Accolade wrote: My current understanding is that Dakka seems to be one of the wargaming forums that has thrived the most these last few years, whereas some of the slightly more GW-centric forums have dwindled in size a bit.
I used to frequent Warseer a lot, but for a while now whenever I go to the site I expect to hear crickets chirping.
underfire wargaming wrote: We now have many companies that are growing better, producing better and better miniatures , games and over all products / settings why'll GW wanes. Now the Stage of GWs dominance begins too dim and become more and more irrelevant too many gamers who are moving towards other products because of GWs policies and disregard too their fanbase.
I agree that the industry itself has more variety than ever before, but don't most of these companies outsource their manufacturing to China? Maybe I have a broader interpretation of what I consider to be "growth" for a company.
This keeps the companies themselves very small, which has pros and cons, but also a loss of knowledge and experience in other aspects of the industry.
Many of these companies are small and are likely to never grow any larger, maybe that's the intent of the founders.
Personally I would love to see another "collective" of industry professionals get started similar in vein to very early GW/Citadel and watch it grow. Oh, and not have it based in Nottingham!
2015/03/03 19:24:54
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
PhantomViper wrote: And as much of a ardent PP supporter as I am (bet you lot hadn't figured it out yet ), I sincerely hope that PP never reaches the prominence and market share that GW has / had.
The current state of the hobby with its myriad companies and games is much more interesting for me than the virtual monopoly that existed 10 years ago.
Fully agreed. I don't want a hegemony in war gaming.
There will never be another GW, the ideal situations were they were found will never exist again, barring some terrible calamity in the industry.
No other company will ever be ten years without any serious competition, in a growing global economy and have in their hands manufacturing that is unobtainable by the competition.
The industry is growing healthy now in a poor soil and with this comes variety.
2015/03/03 20:19:13
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
prplehippo wrote: but don't most of these companies outsource their manufacturing to China?
Not as far as I am aware, most of the 'new wave' companies seem to manufacture their products in the EU.
Warseer, or rather Portent, used to be great but now its an excellent example of what happens when a forum has bad moderators.
Oh yeah. It truly has. When it switched over something happened, maybe it was the new moderators or maybe it's just being older? Or maybe it happened a little later, the PLOG section is still really good.
A lot of stuff is done in China honestly, more than people realize. GW has a lot less production facilities in Nottingham than they used too. Some is outsourced.
2015/03/03 23:16:08
Subject: Re:Rick Priestley on GW's current position
underfire wargaming wrote: We now have many companies that are growing better, producing better and better miniatures , games and over all products / settings why'll GW wanes. Now the Stage of GWs dominance begins too dim and become more and more irrelevant too many gamers who are moving towards other products because of GWs policies and disregard too their fanbase.
I agree that the industry itself has more variety than ever before, but don't most of these companies outsource their manufacturing to China? Maybe I have a broader interpretation of what I consider to be "growth" for a company.
This keeps the companies themselves very small, which has pros and cons, but also a loss of knowledge and experience in other aspects of the industry.
Many of these companies are small and are likely to never grow any larger, maybe that's the intent of the founders.
Personally I would love to see another "collective" of industry professionals get started similar in vein to very early GW/Citadel and watch it grow. Oh, and not have it based in Nottingham!
Growing in the way of diversity and longevity of strength, such as Infinity and PP. manufacturing over in the UK or Europe runs into a few problems, with the two currencies above the Canadian dollar and the extra high cost some areas have it is simply unrealistic for us to ever have casting done over seas. We however support our Caster Down in the US who can produce the exact same Metal and Resin so their is no reason as to why any North American based company should do their casting outside of north America, this is just common sense with logistics and cost.
Now Plastic I have never been a fan of compared too the other two mediums, However we know Redendra exists in the UK however if we were ever to go plastic again the UK Vat tax along with currency exchange differences would make it very unrealistic let alone the current price of the steel molds well beyond reasonable prices. If we were to go ever with producing any of our coming range in plastic since we do not know of anyone in north America that casts in HIP, we would have to go over too China, it sucks but that is just how currency rates have forced the market to go to.
The only companies I see that do not aim to grow are the 3rd party GW focused casters, anyone who is aiming too create their own game and IP would be aiming to create their own product and grow their company and range. I would look at Reaper Miniatures for something like that, they had a few games which were apparently quite good they were done several years ago and sadly never picked up. Some companies are fine with what they have, however those like mine want to reach out and reach a higher goal in our market place.
thank you for your comment I enjoy having such discussions with the community!.
prplehippo wrote: but don't most of these companies outsource their manufacturing to China?
Not as far as I am aware, most of the 'new wave' companies seem to manufacture their products in the EU.
Warseer, or rather Portent, used to be great but now its an excellent example of what happens when a forum has bad moderators.
Oh yeah. It truly has. When it switched over something happened, maybe it was the new moderators or maybe it's just being older? Or maybe it happened a little later, the PLOG section is still really good.
A lot of stuff is done in China honestly, more than people realize. GW has a lot less production facilities in Nottingham than they used too. Some is outsourced.
This as well , I remember hearing they switched a lot of their production over too China a few years ago, cheaper casting costs and higher prices
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/03 23:16:53
jah-joshua wrote:@Jehan-reznor: Dreamforge are not producing GW Space Marines, they are producing Dreamforge Valkir Assault Troopers...
two very different products, with two very different aesthetics...
Spoiler:
to me, those do not look like my vision of a Space Marine, because i am passionate about the art and style of 40K...
obviously, if you choose to use them as a stand-in, that is your choice, but to me those are not GW Space Marines...
i paint GW Space Marines because i like the aesthetic of the GW Space Marine...
I buy GW products because i like their look...
if i choose to buy Dreamforge kits, i will be painting them to represent the kits that they are designed to be in Dreamforge's setting...
i would not be painting them as Space Wolves or Blood Angels, because they do not look like Space Wolves or Blood Angels...
to me, the silhouette of a GW Space Marine is a distinct and iconic, and is my favorite type of mini...
why would you care what i choose to paint???
if you wanted to own my work, you would send me a box of Valkir Assault Troopers, and i would paint them in any way that you want...
that is what being a good commission painter is all about...
bringing the customer's vision to life...
cheers
jah
Ah Jah GW has indoctrinated you well I have no problem with your preference for GW products but to refrain from buying 3rd party stuff? Max mini (those gothic backpacks are awesome!) and kromlech and even GW's arch enemy Chapterhouse
makes some cool stuff to use on (or for) Space marines.
The valkir would make great grey knights and i have seen some conversions with hooded space marine heads to make inquisitors.
Well if you ever checked my mediocre painted space marine army blog, you notice i take anything that i think looks cool to use in my army.
Let's just say we are at different ends of the spectrum when it comes to these things.
Deadnight wrote:@jah Joshua: regarding 'alternative' space marines, how do you rate anvil industry's black ops 'so not space marines' Exo lords? Just curious, mind.
@jehan-reznor: GW has not indoctrinated me at all...
they have been my prefered minis for 30 years...
why would that be a problem for you???
why should i support a 3rd-party company, when their sculpting style does not fit my vision of a 40K Space Marine???
i don't like the Gothic backpacks from Max Mini...
if i want a Steampunk look, i'll paint up some of my massive collection of Privateer Press minis...
I am a purist, nothing more...
my passion is to bring the worlds of a game to life...
if i am painting a PP mini, it is to evoke the WarmaHordes fiction and art in miniature form...
same for 40K or WfB, Infinity, Helldorado, Soda Pop, Rackham, Ilyad, Freebooter, or any of the other companies' minis that i collect...
I am all about reading a company's fiction, looking at their art, and then bringing that setting to life by painting their miniatures...
jah-joshua wrote: @jehan-reznor: GW has not indoctrinated me at all...
Spoiler:
they have been my prefered minis for 30 years...
why would that be a problem for you???
why should i support a 3rd-party company, when their sculpting style does not fit my vision of a 40K Space Marine???
i don't like the Gothic backpacks from Max Mini...
if i want a Steampunk look, i'll paint up some of my massive collection of Privateer Press minis...
I am a purist, nothing more...
my passion is to bring the worlds of a game to life...
if i am painting a PP mini, it is to evoke the WarmaHordes fiction and art in miniature form...
same for 40K or WfB, Infinity, Helldorado, Soda Pop, Rackham, Ilyad, Freebooter, or any of the other companies' minis that i collect...
I am all about reading a company's fiction, looking at their art, and then bringing that setting to life by painting their miniatures...
cheers
jah
The first sentence was said in jest hence the emoticon.
And i said it was not a problem, and i said our opinions are at the opposite ends of the spectrum, just leave it at that.
@Jehan-reznor: even with the emoticon, you should know that telling someone they are indoctrinated is an insult...
i have given clear, rational reasons for why i don't mix manufacturers' minis in my work...
i have also said that i am open to whatever my customers want me to do in order to bring their visions to life...
then you hit me with another jab with the "Why so serious?!" Joker Space Marine...
i am not trying to be a stick in the mud...
i am just expressing what i am passionate about...
the aesthetic, setting, and art of GW just happen to be something that have been a huge part of me creative life for 30 years...
in person, with my friends, we can make fun of each other all we want, with no problem...
on the internet, from a stranger, i am going to defend my opinion...
i am fine with you and i being on the opposite spectrum of opinion...
i am not cool with you insulting me, and saying it is just in jest...
you could have ended that last post, very easily, without another jab at me...
i don't have a problem with you, your work, or your opinion...
i do have a problem with the way you are treating me in your last few posts...
i work damn hard on perfecting my painting and conversion skills, and put a lot of thought into what i do...
i have never once defended GW's business practices, only my appreciation for the aesthetic of their sculpts, and the love i have for the art and fiction...
so yeah, what is a jest to you, is an insult to me...
you are right, though, we should leave it...
i have gone off-topic enough here, and will stop taking the bait...
Ok, i shall refrain from using humor on you, as you take everything too serious, i apologized, i said i had no issues that you are a purist, and a picture of a why so serious marine with joker face-paint is an insult?
Just to offer a third party perspective, the "indoctrination" jab seemed to clearly be good natured teasing. If you choose to take it as an insult, well, that's on you...
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
so much character.
