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.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Ultimately whats the difference (quality wise) between these (1 NZD each, hundreds of weapon bits and poses)



And these (4NZD each, no posing, spear or hand weapon choices)

One is a bunch of generic samurai and the other is the mother Seraphon, Slann memories from a different age, who ride on dinosaurs and have a flying mummy frog wizard?

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

Ultimately whats the difference (quality wise) between these (1 NZD each, hundreds of weapon bits and poses)



And these (4NZD each, no posing, spear or hand weapon choices)

One is a bunch of generic samurai and the other is the mother Seraphon, Slann memories from a different age, who ride on dinosaurs and have a flying mummy frog wizard?

Very perceptive of you, indeed the ideas and stories behind each set of models designs is vastly different. The end result of quality and presentation however is not vastly different.

Samurai are non fiction and Lizardmen are fiction?

 Chute82 wrote:
Samurai are non fiction and Lizardmen are fiction?

Come on dude, you can read right? I assume so since you can write.

Does the quality of the model change because one is non fiction and the other is fiction?

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
Samurai are non fiction and Lizardmen are fiction?

Come on dude, you can read right? I assume so since you can write.

Does the quality of the model change because one is non fiction and the other is fiction?

No I can't read dropped out of school after 2nd grade when I got my 30 year old girlfriend pregnant.

 Chute82 wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
Samurai are non fiction and Lizardmen are fiction?

Come on dude, you can read right? I assume so since you can write.

Does the quality of the model change because one is non fiction and the other is fiction?

No I can't read dropped out of school after 2nd grade when I got my 30 year old girlfriend pregnant.

Thought so. I just didn't want to assume outright.

those wargame factory samurai are great for L5R

 Swastakowey wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
@Swasta: if you don't see any difference between the Mantic Chaos Dwarves, and the Forge World Chaos Dwarves, then you are stoked, as you will be happy with the cheaper minis...

personally, i see a huge difference in their appearance, and wouldn't buy the Mantic ones at half the price...
the Forge World ones look so much better to my eye, that it isn't even a question of which ones are worth spending money on...
The little horns on the champs head, the scale mail, the faceless helms, and wicked trophies in their beards are little touches that make the FW minis my prefered choice...

the thing is, you say that painting can make any model look good, and i agree with you to an extent, the difference is, which model will make you feel inspired to put in the hard work of actually creating the amazing paint job???
for me, the Forge World ones are inspirational sculpts to paint, while the Mantic ones would just be a massive chore, and not fun at all to paint...

different strokes for different folks...
as a guy who's only concern is inspirational aesthetics, Mantic have not convinced me to spend a single penny on any of the models in their range...
they just don't visually appeal to me, at all...

cheers
jah

You are agreeing with me by the way, because the only reason you don't by from Mantic is "they don't visually appeal to you". However ignoring the subjective appeal there is no reason to get GW models when it comes to hobby time, price per model and final result. The only difference between GW and most competitors ignoring the crazy prices and design is that you simply like the way GW models look. Nothing really to do with quality etc in most circumstances.

yes, i agree with your logic, just not your conclusion...
why would i ignore the subjective appeal???
that is kind of the whole point...
i am not able to ignore the subjective appeal of the look of a mini, or anything else in the world, when it comes to choosing how to spend my money...
price is not something i even think about, except to double check that i have enough cash in my pocket to make the purchase...
"Is it the look I want?" and "Is it a material I am willing to work with?", are the only things i ever ask myself when it comes to buying minis...

where your argument gets sticky is with the comparison between the Samurai and the Lizardmen...
i get the Mantic vs. Forge World comparison, as they are basically the same product, but with two different aesthetics...
Samurai and Lizzies is apples and oranges...
would someone looking for a Samurai kit is not going to settle for a Lizzie kit instead, and vice versa???
i don't think so, but i am not simply looking for the best deal on minis, i look for the best deal on minis that i want...
that is a huge difference, and means i am willing to pay more to get what i want, rather than settle for something i don't, just to save a few bucks...

cheers
jah

 jah-joshua wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
@Swasta: if you don't see any difference between the Mantic Chaos Dwarves, and the Forge World Chaos Dwarves, then you are stoked, as you will be happy with the cheaper minis...

personally, i see a huge difference in their appearance, and wouldn't buy the Mantic ones at half the price...
the Forge World ones look so much better to my eye, that it isn't even a question of which ones are worth spending money on...
The little horns on the champs head, the scale mail, the faceless helms, and wicked trophies in their beards are little touches that make the FW minis my prefered choice...

the thing is, you say that painting can make any model look good, and i agree with you to an extent, the difference is, which model will make you feel inspired to put in the hard work of actually creating the amazing paint job???
for me, the Forge World ones are inspirational sculpts to paint, while the Mantic ones would just be a massive chore, and not fun at all to paint...

different strokes for different folks...
as a guy who's only concern is inspirational aesthetics, Mantic have not convinced me to spend a single penny on any of the models in their range...
they just don't visually appeal to me, at all...

cheers
jah

You are agreeing with me by the way, because the only reason you don't by from Mantic is "they don't visually appeal to you". However ignoring the subjective appeal there is no reason to get GW models when it comes to hobby time, price per model and final result. The only difference between GW and most competitors ignoring the crazy prices and design is that you simply like the way GW models look. Nothing really to do with quality etc in most circumstances.

yes, i agree with your logic, just not your conclusion...
why would i ignore the subjective appeal???
that is kind of the whole point...
i am not able to ignore the subjective appeal of the look of a mini, or anything else in the world, when it comes to choosing how to spend my money...
price is not something i even think about, except to double check that i have enough cash in my pocket to make the purchase...
"Is it the look I want?" and "Is it a material I am willing to work with?", are the only things i ever ask myself when it comes to buying minis...

where your argument gets sticky is with the comparison between the Samurai and the Lizardmen...
i get the Mantic vs. Forge World comparison, as they are basically the same product, but with two different aesthetics...
Samurai and Lizzies is apples and oranges...
would someone looking for a Samurai kit is not going to settle for a Lizzie kit instead, and vice versa???
i don't think so, but i am not simply looking for the best deal on minis, i look for the best deal on minis that i want...
that is a huge difference, and means i am willing to pay more to get what i want, rather than settle for something i don't, just to save a few bucks...

cheers
jah

I was simply saying the only reason to buy from GW is because you like them, it's a rip off every way you look at it unless you like them for X reason or can't find an alternative.

I don't even know what or why you are arguing.

My original point was saying there is hardly a difference in the end product between most Mantic models and GW models unless you simply don't like the designs of Mantic and don't mind paying 4X the amount (more usually), and this is the case between most (all that I have used) manufacturers of models.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Very perceptive of you, indeed the ideas and stories behind each set of models designs is vastly different. The end result of quality and presentation however is not vastly different.

The point is that, quality wise, one set of models is generic and one is not. The Seraphon have a lot of character - all of it conveyed through the models themselves. The samurai models have none, and I say this as someone with more than a passing interest in Japanese history, who majored in Asian history, and who lived in Japan and visited actual historical castles and battlefields. I would play that game, but I would not buy those models separate from that game - I would and have bought GW models without playing the games. Those samurai are glorified pawns for a game that requires a lot of pawns, their design quality reflects that, and they are priced appropriately as such.

@Swasta: are we arguing???
i thought we were having a conversation

i get your point, and i see why you feel that way...
i'm simply pointing out that for some of us, aesthetic is king, and that makes all the difference...

cheers
jah

 jah-joshua wrote:
@Swasta: are we arguing???
i thought we were having a conversation

i get your point, and i see why you feel that way...
i'm simply pointing out that for some of us, aesthetic is king, and that makes all the difference...

cheers
jah

Sorry I just dont understand the way you type, it sounds like you are saying what im saying but weirdly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

Very perceptive of you, indeed the ideas and stories behind each set of models designs is vastly different. The end result of quality and presentation however is not vastly different.

The point is that, quality wise, one set of models is generic and one is not. The Seraphon have a lot of character - all of it conveyed through the models themselves. The samurai models have none, and I say this as someone with more than a passing interest in Japanese history, who majored in Asian history, and who lived in Japan and visited actual historical castles and battlefields. I would play that game, but I would not buy those models separate from that game - I would and have bought GW models without playing the games. Those samurai are glorified pawns for a game that requires a lot of pawns, their design quality reflects that, and they are priced appropriately as such.

Their design quality is the same as the seraphon. I own 180 of them and have owned hundreds of Lizardmen, the only difference is the look and the price. The design choices have nothing to do with quality... thats 100% personal taste and the only reason to buy GW models is based on personal taste. The quality difference between finished models of most companies is pretty much identical. This is true for Mantic for example.

Those Samurai also aren't made for any game either, they are simply made for people who want samurai themed models.

So what you are saying is "I want Lizardmen, thats why I pay 4X the price", which is what I am saying. It's not because the other company has bad models, it's simply because you happen to like GW exclusively. So if you look at the person I replied to it makes sense as to why I was pointing out that Mantics models are not bad quality 99% of the time, they just happen to not like their design. Which is also why GW is over priced when you compare their products with others, the only reason anyone in their right mind would pay those prices is because they like the designs a lot or because there is no alternative. Anybody who says it's to do with quality is confusing their taste with quality.

This is simply trying to increase margins by GW to defer losses on AoS.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Their design quality is the same as the seraphon. I own 180 of them and have owned hundreds of Lizardmen, the only difference is the look and the price. The design choices have nothing to do with quality... thats 100% personal taste and the only reason to buy GW models is based on personal taste. The quality difference between finished models of most companies is pretty much identical. This is true for Mantic for example.

If you mean that they are both made from plastic, then I can not tell their quality when they are painted like that. Warmachine, for example, has terrible plastic models with bubbles and horrible flash lines across detail. I can't tell how many pieces there are, how well they fit together (Malifaux has some figures where tiny things like beards are separate parts), how likely the sprues are to break in transport, which type of glue is appropriate (I vastly prefer polystyrene glue), whether the plastic warps in heat, how breakable their major components are, and so on. In short, anything that would be relevant to their quality as plastic models is impossible to tell from pictures of them fully assembled and painted. I have some experience with the lizardmen because I'm sitting on a box of them right now.

I'm not sure what your argument here is except that both sets of models are adequately moulded and similarly transported in boxes that you can acquire in exchange for money. Both being models with relatively few obvious defects doesn't seem to be a strong argument, because nobody really judges their purchases based on whether they exist in the same time space continuum as something else. It's like arguing that Harry Potter is better than Foundation because it has more pages for the same price.

So what you are saying is "I want Lizardmen, thats why I pay 4X the price", which is what I am saying. It's not because the other company has bad models, it's simply because you happen to like GW exclusively.

Not even remotely true. I've got some Infinity, Malifaux, and Warmachine models on my painting table. I also own dozens of mini-heavy boardgames, like BattleLore, Imperial Assault, Sedition Wars, Tannhauser, Super Dungeon Explore, Earth Reborn, Dust Tactics, yada yada yada - I'm not going to paint those figures, but I like them none the less. My room is drowning in tiny little plastic people. I pay more for GW models because I think GW makes high quality models that are generally worth the extra cost. I won't even buy plastic Warmachine models anymore (and I'm rather fond of WMH's design sensibilities). If they could reach GW's quality at GW's price, I'd start buying WMH models again.

So if you look at the person I replied to it makes sense as to why I was pointing out that Mantics models are not bad quality 99% of the time, they just happen to not like their design.

I only have Deadzone by Mantic, but I do not think the models are even remotely in the same ballpark as GW. For one thing, all the sprues were thrown into a box way too big for them along with a bunch of other things (rubber mat, rulebook) with nothing to keep them from bouncing around, causing many of the terrain sprues to be damaged in transit. The figures had their pieces cut clumsily off the sprues and thrown into a little plastic baggy, with some of the arms and stuff being warped from getting crammed together. It's like they just could not give less of a gak. If your argument is that Mantic also makes models that are in a box, their box was an embarrassment.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

Their design quality is the same as the seraphon. I own 180 of them and have owned hundreds of Lizardmen, the only difference is the look and the price. The design choices have nothing to do with quality... thats 100% personal taste and the only reason to buy GW models is based on personal taste. The quality difference between finished models of most companies is pretty much identical. This is true for Mantic for example.

If you mean that they are both made from plastic, then I can not tell their quality when they are painted like that. Warmachine, for example, has terrible plastic models with bubbles and horrible flash lines across detail. I can't tell how many pieces there are, how well they fit together (Malifaux has some figures where tiny things like beards are separate parts), how likely the sprues are to break in transport, which type of glue is appropriate (I vastly prefer polystyrene glue), whether the plastic warps in heat, how breakable their major components are, and so on. In short, anything that would be relevant to their quality as plastic models is impossible to tell from pictures of them fully assembled and painted. I have some experience with the lizardmen because I'm sitting on a box of them right now.

I'm not sure what your argument here is except that both sets of models are adequately moulded and similarly transported in boxes that you can acquire in exchange for money. Both being models with relatively few obvious defects doesn't seem to be a strong argument, because nobody really judges their purchases based on whether they exist in the same time space continuum as something else. It's like arguing that Harry Potter is better than Foundation because it has more pages for the same price.

So what you are saying is "I want Lizardmen, thats why I pay 4X the price", which is what I am saying. It's not because the other company has bad models, it's simply because you happen to like GW exclusively.

Not even remotely true. I've got some Infinity, Malifaux, and Warmachine models on my painting table. I also own dozens of mini-heavy boardgames, like BattleLore, Imperial Assault, Sedition Wars, Tannhauser, Super Dungeon Explore, Earth Reborn, Dust Tactics, yada yada yada - I'm not going to paint those figures, but I like them none the less. My room is drowning in tiny little plastic people. I pay more for GW models because I think GW makes high quality models that are generally worth the extra cost. I won't even buy plastic Warmachine models anymore (and I'm rather fond of WMH's design sensibilities). If they could reach GW's quality at GW's price, I'd start buying WMH models again.

So if you look at the person I replied to it makes sense as to why I was pointing out that Mantics models are not bad quality 99% of the time, they just happen to not like their design.

I only have Deadzone by Mantic, but I do not think the models are even remotely in the same ballpark as GW. For one thing, all the sprues were thrown into a box way too big for them along with a bunch of other things (rubber mat, rulebook) with nothing to keep them from bouncing around, causing many of the terrain sprues to be damaged in transit. The figures had their pieces cut clumsily off the sprues and thrown into a little plastic baggy, with some of the arms and stuff being warped from getting crammed together. It's like they just could not give less of a gak. If your argument is that Mantic also makes models that are in a box, their box was an embarrassment.

Tiny parts, preferred glue and type of plastic isn't really quality issues, mold lines are potentially but GW has horrible mold lines, especially FW but after the modeling is done they look like any other kit. Ultimately all kits need mold and flash clean up and assembly, this is normal. I have not heard of melting plastic but I live in a temperate place.

Every plastic warmachine model I have seen was immaculate and then when the paint job was on top they look just like any other painted model.

By the sounds of it you may just be a little picky? All model kits need work, it's like having to shave mold lines, fill in gaps with greenstuff (especially GW larger kits) and so on. Personally FW is the only company I have hit and miss stuff from but even then after the minor prep work it looked just like any other model... except 4X the price.

@Swasta: when you say "plastic Warmachine" do you mean the restic stuff, or the couple of proper HIPS kits they have released???
the restic i have handled have put me off purchasing them...
i'll still buy their proper resin, metal, and HIPS kits, but restic's quality is horrible in my experience...

same reason i won't buy Finecast...
it just isn't a replacement of equal quality to the previous metal versions...
it's a huge step down in casting quality, and no fun to work with unless you already plan to cut the mini to hell and do some sculpting anyway...

to get back to what we were debating, you seem to be saying that people should purchase based on price, rather than aesthetics...
my point is that, given two models of equal quality in casting, i'm going for the one i like the look of the most, even if it is more expensive...
there is no way i am going to settle for something i don't like the look of, just to save a few bucks...

cheers
jah

 Swastakowey wrote:
I have seen the Abyssal dwarves and fought them and they hardly look bad. You may not like the style but the end result is hardly very bad.


Hardly a difference really. I mean, I don't like either because im not a dwarven player however I would hardly notice the difference between the 2 when they are both painted nicely. Really it's just the designs are different (oh and the price obviously).

Ah no mate they really do. The detailing is poor, the construction is poor, the posability is poor, the metal upgrades for commands/blunderbusses don't fit probably and leave big gaps, metal parts on plastic is bad anyway. And that all makes them very uninspiring to paint. I built two units. Painted one. It's like comparing a mouldly old apple to an orchard in a country estate.

Ultimately whats the difference (quality wise) between these (1 NZD each, hundreds of weapon bits and poses)

And these (4NZD each, no posing, spear or hand weapon choices)

One is a set I'd buy the other isn't a set I'd even go looking for. Times may change, but I've not been interested in historical minis since I was kid about 35 years ago.

Demand is a big thing with pricing, the more people want your product the higher you can charge compared to one where few want it; because it is not even a category of product they have any interest, quality being at that point irrelevant.

I totally get the quality vs. quantity argument is subjective, but this is a hobby. It's a leisure activity.

Using Mantic as an example, I've never been able to trust them with any money because the quality of their output is so variable.
Hobby-wise, I'm a big believer in imperfections multiplying. A badly designed/realised mini is a pain to prep, a badly prepped mini is a pain to paint, and a badly painted mini is just disappointing.
The majority of my hobby time is spent going over minis with a magnifying glass checking that there are no gaps, flash, moldlines etc.

Check out the Mantic Supreme Ironcaster on Winged Halfbreed. That is a recent release, and is an army centrepiece.
And it is objectively terrible. Aesthetics aside (because you can see what they were going for, and I like it), the sculpt is terrible. Muscles with sharp right angles, talons that wouldn't pierce cardboard.. the execution is atrocious.

I am not defending GW's pricing, nor am I stating that people who buy other mini producers' kits are wrong or whatever. But for me - aesthetics aside again - I have not encountered a technically bad GW plastic kit in *years*.

That's why I'm happy to pay for them. I don't buy them as often now because of the prices and I have a fixed budget, but that is a 'price' (haha...) I'm willing to pay knowing I will get far more enjoyment out of the 'hobby' side of the hobby.

But once they're painted and on the board, I can accept the end result might not justify the price to everybody.

 doktor_g wrote:
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Oathbound-Throng


21 Dwarves for $170?

Are you fething joking? Are they made from diamonds, and unicorn tears?

$8 for 1 dwarf. WTF?!

unicorn tears...
Maybe I have permission to use that elsewhere, please. A fine theory. Seems like unicorns are bountiful creatures now with magic tears for duardin and Magic poo for the Squatty Potty (YouTube this one if you haven't)

 Swastakowey wrote:

Tiny parts, preferred glue and type of plastic isn't really quality issues...

Yeah it is. For instance, super glue is really strong when pulled, but very weak when sheared. Plastic glue actually melts the plastic between the seams, creating a much strong bond with far less glue or the need for pinning. A lot of GW's more dynamic models only connect in very small places - I just assembled some Chaos Knights that had only two hooves connecting to the base. Because the plastic used is pretty strong and doesn't warp easily, and because the glue used creates a sufficiently strong bond, I'm not concerned about the models. Compare that to the half resin/plastic, half white metal cavalry from Warmachine, where the plastic legs start to sag under the weigh and don't glue to the metal with a particularly strong bond.

As for tiny pieces, have you ever tried to keep the ears antennae things on Infinity models? They fall off all the time, you can't pin them because they are too small, and when they do fall off, you spend twenty minutes combing the floor looking for them. I'll let people pick up and see my GW models, but nobody but me touches my Infinity characters.

These are qualitative differences in the materials and design of the models completely separate from the aesthetic.

Every plastic warmachine model I have seen was immaculate and then when the paint job was on top they look just like any other painted model.

Lucky you. I had to boil some warped Retribution figures just to get them standing straight, and there are some Convergence models I have that had mold lines running through details (not to mention had holes left by bubbles).

By the sounds of it you may just be a little picky? All model kits need work, it's like having to shave mold lines, fill in gaps with greenstuff (especially GW larger kits) and so on. Personally FW is the only company I have hit and miss stuff from but even then after the minor prep work it looked just like any other model... except 4X the price.

All models require work, but some models need more work than others. Not every toy soldier is made equally. I look forward to assembling GW models and still have WMH Retribution models from the All-In-One box that I haven't bothered to put together yet. I had my metal Egregore snap off due to being designed around having this heavy metal ball being suspended by a soft metal spike thinner than a paper clip. I love the aesthetics of WMH models - love it - but the models themselves frequently have architectural flaws or suffer from poor material used.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Snoopdeville3 wrote:
I don't know what the rules are for these guys are but my guess they are good.

Basing the price of something mostly around the rules rather than quality and quantity of models and the cost of manufactre/distribution is an ass-backwards way of doing things.

'I have a plain 1" disc of plastic on sale for $200 - comes with fantastic, must have rules for your free ruleset game!!!'

..... I was being sarcastic ... dont get you panties in a bunch...

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

Tiny parts, preferred glue and type of plastic isn't really quality issues...

Yeah it is. For instance, super glue is really strong when pulled, but very weak when sheared. Plastic glue actually melts the plastic between the seams, creating a much strong bond with far less glue or the need for pinning. A lot of GW's more dynamic models only connect in very small places - I just assembled some Chaos Knights that had only two hooves connecting to the base. Because the plastic used is pretty strong and doesn't warp easily, and because the glue used creates a sufficiently strong bond, I'm not concerned about the models. Compare that to the half resin/plastic, half white metal cavalry from Warmachine, where the plastic legs start to sag under the weigh and don't glue to the metal with a particularly strong bond.

As for tiny pieces, have you ever tried to keep the ears antennae things on Infinity models? They fall off all the time, you can't pin them because they are too small, and when they do fall off, you spend twenty minutes combing the floor looking for them. I'll let people pick up and see my GW models, but nobody but me touches my Infinity characters.

These are qualitative differences in the materials and design of the models completely separate from the aesthetic.

Every plastic warmachine model I have seen was immaculate and then when the paint job was on top they look just like any other painted model.

Lucky you. I had to boil some warped Retribution figures just to get them standing straight, and there are some Convergence models I have that had mold lines running through details (not to mention had holes left by bubbles).

By the sounds of it you may just be a little picky? All model kits need work, it's like having to shave mold lines, fill in gaps with greenstuff (especially GW larger kits) and so on. Personally FW is the only company I have hit and miss stuff from but even then after the minor prep work it looked just like any other model... except 4X the price.

All models require work, but some models need more work than others. Not every toy soldier is made equally. I look forward to assembling GW models and still have WMH Retribution models from the All-In-One box that I haven't bothered to put together yet. I had my metal Egregore snap off due to being designed around having this heavy metal ball being suspended by a soft metal spike thinner than a paper clip. I love the aesthetics of WMH models - love it - but the models themselves frequently have architectural flaws or suffer from poor material used.

Epoxy sounds like the glue you need. If I can't pin it, or glue it conventionally epoxy does the trick.

Holes and gaps can be found in 99% of models, this is true of GW too. Thats why we all have green stuff of sorts, to fix and cover them. I know some people use paint to fill in gaps but this is generally an amateurish thing to do. Chances are if a model is assembled there are gaps.

A lot of your issues come from one design being thin and detailed while the other is going to be chunky and averagely detailed. So antenna for example? Directly resulting from aesthetic. Huge shoulders on huge torso means you can slather on glue and go to town. But this is aesthetic, if Infinity had huge warped models they would be easy to glue too.

Things like Structure are present in all models, take harlequins for example. They very often fall over and require weighted bases to keep them up (even then...), simply because GW wanted them to be all standing on terrain and flying in the air. Obviously when a model is trying to do more it requires more work. If you don't enjoy putting in the work sticking to basic models is often the easiest route. Compare to these samurai who are simply standing, all of a sudden there are a lot less potential modeling jobs to do.

Ultimately, you like what you like. But your issues sound pretty normal for all kinds of models regardless of company.

 jah-joshua wrote:
to get back to what we were debating, you seem to be saying that people should purchase based on price, rather than aesthetics...my point is that, given two models of equal quality in casting, i'm going for the one i like the look of the most, even if it is more expensive...
there is no way i am going to settle for something i don't like the look of, just to save a few bucks...
cheers
jah

In principle I can understand the concept that cheaping-out is not a good way to go, especially when all that effort is put in to paint a nice model: you need to start from a good foundation.
I think the difficulty is when it starts looking like "I want the best and money is no object".
It appears we are reaching a saturation point for many that the quality of the product is not comparable to how dear a cost they are asking for.
I can definitely say that there is a huge variety of esthetic appeal within the GW line but for many the justification or draw is the opportunity to play a game that has a long history.
I am finding the chunky heroic look of GW models are not as much to my liking compared to other games (Malifaux, Kingdom of Death).
The price point would be "reasonable" for the odd one-off but not to build an army.
The army buyers are the ones who help float the company, as soon as they leave the model cost will have to go to showpiece levels of price.

Just expressing the usual fear of GW taking a big misstep and making gaming unjustifiable with their products.

 Swastakowey wrote:



I was simply saying the only reason to buy from GW is because you like them, it's a rip off every way you look at it unless you like them for X reason or can't find an alternative.

What is a rip off? Going to a bar for a drink drinks? That is a rip off, at least in Canada. So much cheaper to go to the liquor store and stay home. How about eating and dining out? So much cheaper to eat at home. How about going to the cinema? So much cheaper to see a movie at home. That is one of the biggest rip offs. How about buying automobiles?

Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it's a rip off, because for other people they enjoy it and is not a rip off. Yours is opinion, not fact, but you talk as if it was fact. I am sure something you like or enjoy, someone will say it's a rip off. Don't try and make other people feel bad for something they enjoy just because you don't agree with them.

 doktor_g wrote:
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Oathbound-Throng


21 Dwarves for $170?

Are you fething joking? Are they made from diamonds, and unicorn tears?

$8 for 1 dwarf. WTF?!

Check this out. http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Champions-of-Erebor-Web-Bundle

The Champions of Erebor - $190. $20 more for 2/3 the models. Those dwarves are even smaller than the Oathbound guys, too.

And that is why I have quit Lord of the Ring and never got into The Hobbit Breotan. I just don't find them worth it.

I just don't find the prices for Age of Sigmar worth it either so haven't bought that either.

Davor wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:



I was simply saying the only reason to buy from GW is because you like them, it's a rip off every way you look at it unless you like them for X reason or can't find an alternative.

What is a rip off? Going to a bar for a drink drinks? That is a rip off, at least in Canada. So much cheaper to go to the liquor store and stay home. How about eating and dining out? So much cheaper to eat at home. How about going to the cinema? So much cheaper to see a movie at home. That is one of the biggest rip offs. How about buying automobiles?

Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it's a rip off, because for other people they enjoy it and is not a rip off. Yours is opinion, not fact, but you talk as if it was fact. I am sure something you like or enjoy, someone will say it's a rip off. Don't try and make other people feel bad for something they enjoy just because you don't agree with them.

Woosh, missing the point.

Th only thing that GW has got going for them is that people like their design enough to by them and overlook their absurd cost (and even then most people buy them while complaining). Other than that they aren't much different from any other company. Like I keep saying, the only reason to buy from them is because you happen to like their look and there is no alternative. In every other way GW prices are a rip off when you compare them to most other models.

Take your example, going to the cinema has obvious benefits over seeing it at home (huge screen etc), buying a GW empire swordsmen over a normal swordsman has nearly no advantage other than you happen to like the empire swordsmen since the GW swordsmen is like 4X the price or more over any normal model that makes GW a rip off in every way other than you got the look you wanted.

You missed my point my friend. Don't say your opinion is fact. Hell I agree with you, just don't like when people think their opinion is fact. If anything you act like GW in that how their opinion is the correct opinion.

So how can you be taken seriously when you act exactly like the people we complain about?

Instead of trying to prove that you are correct, let's just debate, agree we all have difference of opinion and that we don't have to prove that we are right and they are wrong.

This is the problems with us Nerds and Geeks in the last few decades. We have to be proven correct. It's a discussion. We don't have to prove in what we think is correct and others need to agree to it. A lot of people love sardines. A lot of people love Justin Beiber. Doesn't mean they are wrong, that it's not for us. They are no more wrong than we are.

So you are not wrong in thinking GW is a rip off when other people don't think GW is a rip off and stop trying to prove it. It's all personal opinion and not fact.

Davor wrote:
You missed my point my friend. Don't say your opinion is fact. Hell I agree with you, just don't like when people think their opinion is fact. If anything you act like GW in that how their opinion is the correct opinion.

So how can you be taken seriously when you act exactly like the people we complain about?

Instead of trying to prove that you are correct, let's just debate, agree we all have difference of opinion and that we don't have to prove that we are right and they are wrong.

This is the problems with us Nerds and Geeks in the last few decades. We have to be proven correct. It's a discussion. We don't have to prove in what we think is correct and others need to agree to it. A lot of people love sardines. A lot of people love Justin Beiber. Doesn't mean they are wrong, that it's not for us. They are no more wrong than we are.

So you are not wrong in thinking GW is a rip off when other people don't think GW is a rip off and stop trying to prove it. It's all personal opinion and not fact.

very good point, Davor!!!
beautiful post...

cheers
jah