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.

This thread has been very interesting to watch as it has unfolded, and I have yet to contribute, so here comes yet another opinion on the issues that have been raised...

On a personal level, I am not a fan of the models. I enjoy painting toy soldiers. I don't enjoy painting toy boobs for the sake of boobs. I don't want models that are intended to arouse anyone, that's not what I want from my hobby. That is irrelevant though as it is only a personal opinion.

Objectively though, I can't decide what I think. If there is a demand for this product, and it isn't illegal, I theoretically don't have an issue with someone supplying it. I also don't have an issue (in theory) with the impractical armour, I suppose, as it's fantasy, I can see how that aesthetic might fulfil some people's idea of fantasy. It might not be my taste, but it might be someone else's. I don't have an issue with the representation of the female body any more than I do with how the male body is portrayed in the hobby (most of us look more like blightkings than Reavers).

On the other hand, it is already a hobby that struggles to get social acceptance, and products like this only contribute to the negative stereotype that already exists. I wouldn't want anyone associating (or judging) me and my hobby with products like this because they are in the same market place. I think others that have posted negatively in the thread might share this concern. However, that is not a reason not to produce or buy the game, it is just a possible consequence that the hobby community will have to endure.

I think it is regrettable that there is a market for such models (and there are plenty of companies making them, the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby), but there clearly is, so I have to accept that, no point complaining.

One more opinion though, two companies having a public argument on the biggest wargaming forum? I think you are both ridiculous and should demonstrate a lot more professionalism, before you loose any more prospective customers. Having watched how you conduct yourselves, I wouldn't spend a penny with either of you, whatever you produce.

Prodos have been very restraint and with how they have been treated here I wouldn't be surprised if they posted here ever again, it's this Artemis Black fellow [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS] and the very fact he has been allowed to carry on the way he has been speaks volumes about this forum. For shame Dakka and Mods for shame.

Product criticism is part of....producing things. Anyone that produces sub par garbage gets called out for it, that's Dakka.
Glad you're here to White Knight for them though, poor little company needs protection from all these potential clients expressing their opinions.

overtyrant wrote:
Prodos have been very restraint and with how they have been treated here I wouldn't be surprised if they posted here ever again, it's this Artemis Black fellow [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS] and the very fact he has been allowed to carry on the way he has been speaks volumes about this forum. For shame Dakka and Mods for shame.

Rule 1 has been mentioned a bunch, and has been followed pretty well. The attacks have been about quality of work, not about people. If you want to exercise your right to vote with your wallet, then do so, both ways. Buy from the one you like and don't buy from the other. I live in America where we have the right to criticize work, but we can also be held accountable for it when we cross the line. Artemis has said his views on the product (I have many of the same feelings about the quality of work, but I am not an artist, so it doesn't hold the weight). I will buy from HFminis because most of their stuff is tasteful or at least has a concept to it, this is just gratuitous for the sake of shock and awe.

 dragqueeninspace wrote:
That is assuming the reason people state is the real reason.

"I think they look sexist" could really be "I don't want to look like a perv" or "I want to sound progressive/superior". With things like this people regularly deceive themselves let alone each other.

What is wrong wit being a perv?
Don't hide behind a mask of acceptance!

 JamesY wrote:


Objectively though, I can't decide what I think. If there is a demand for this product, and it isn't illegal, I theoretically don't have an issue with someone supplying it. I also don't have an issue (in theory) with the impractical armour, I suppose, as it's fantasy, I can see how that aesthetic might fulfil some people's idea of fantasy. It might not be my taste, but it might be someone else's. I don't have an issue with the representation of the female body any more than I do with how the male body is portrayed in the hobby (most of us look more like blightkings than Reavers).

Yeah, if it isn't illegal and there is the demand for this then what's the problem? I think they look pretty cool and will definitely purchase some in the near future (when I get paid.)

On the other hand, it is already a hobby that struggles to get social acceptance, and products like this only contribute to the negative stereotype that already exists. I wouldn't want anyone associating (or judging) me and my hobby with products like this because they are in the same market place. I think others that have posted negatively in the thread might share this concern. However, that is not a reason not to produce or buy the game, it is just a possible consequence that the hobby community will have to endure.

I think it is regrettable that there is a market for such models (and there are plenty of companies making them, the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby), but there clearly is, so I have to accept that, no point complaining.

I also don't think this matters at all. Social acceptance means nothing at all. Comic books, movies, music, etc all have suffered from bad PR and puritanical groups trying to take them down and have failed. There is very adult content on all those mediums yet it doesn't "bring the medium down." Just because it exists, it doesn't make Space Marines suddenly pornography. If something risqué existing makes you hesitate to enter a fandom then you won't be able to enter any of them. There is a market for a lot of stuff out there, taking advantage of it is what makes capitalism work. (as long as it's legal )

One more opinion though, two companies having a public argument on the biggest wargaming forum? I think you are both ridiculous and should demonstrate a lot more professionalism, before you loose any more prospective customers. Having watched how you conduct yourselves, I wouldn't spend a penny with either of you, whatever you produce.

agreed.

 plastictrees wrote:
Product criticism is part of....producing things. Anyone that produces sub par garbage gets called out for it, that's Dakka.
Glad you're here to White Knight for them though, poor little company needs protection from all these potential clients expressing their opinions.

thank goodness we have so many authorities here to tell us what is garbage. It doesn't sound like he's being a white knight but rather someone who is just tired of listening to page after page of the same endless crap over and over. Say your piece and call it a day. The social commentary gets old after awhile.

Maybe we could move some of the tangential discussions of sexism and professionalism into another more appropriate thread in Dakka Discussions.

I'm not trying to silence anyone but, honestly, those aren't issues that are going to be hashed out here and only seem to inflame posters and derail the topic.

 JamesY wrote:


... the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby

.

I feel I'm missing something? did you just say Reaper Miniatures released a miniature with an exposed anus?

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
My main argument is that your company essentially produces the same genre stuff.

Yes, so you've said. Just like I've said that I, quite strongly, disagree. As do others in this thread and elsewhere.

It seems pointless to argue about it as if you can't see the difference with your eyes then no amount of words will change a thing.

overtyrant wrote:
Prodos have been very restraint and with how they have been treated here I wouldn't be surprised if they posted here ever again, it's this Artemis Black fellow [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS] and the very fact he has been allowed to carry on the way he has been speaks volumes about this forum. For shame Dakka and Mods for shame.

Don't kid yourself, Chief. Prodos has received a gracious ovation, compared to how they treat their consumers. As for Artemis, he's been more then reasonable, in light on the point to target of pimping a game of superpower armor, with tits.

I'm honestly interested if Prodos will even pull it off. I have no faith that they will do so, and in light of the subject, they have done this same one trick pony trick, ... three times, now. show you some nifty 3d graphics of what they ... intend. to do.. and then come up with odd excuses as to why they can't produce. Kickstarter is funny like that , in that they actually let that excuse slide.

On my end, hey... nice pictures... do you have any miniatures, done yet?

Where the rubber hits the raod, we are talking miniatures, here. from a company that has still yet to deliver on two game systems, so far, and now wants to pimp out another....


No product, no munnies.

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
You'll be needing coherent male sculpts for it fo actually feel like an integrated force. How about something like this:

Spoiler:

Too tame, maybe? Guess it needs legs/arms protection, though.

To be consistent with the rest of the range presented here, I believe they'd have to modify the original design from a diaper to a thong in the back. I believe the aerodynamics of that are better for riding the inevitable dirt bike motorcycles. I also believe they'll have to add much more additional padding along the front of the diaper so that the level of beefcake matches the previously presented cheescake.

Not to be persnickety, but when I see comments like this (of the form "if only the had male figures in such a scandalous state of undress..."), I can't help but think... "where have you guys been?"

Not to say that Zardoz is unknown. But one scarcely needs to go back to 1974 to find examples of action heroes with little in the way of clothes (fun fact, Sean Connery's costar in Zardoz? Best Lead Actress Oscar Nominee Charlotte Rampling.)

How about 1982 and a little movie staring a little known foreign actor? Probably a little art house pic though, I think the guy was named... Arnold Strong.


Obviously that's a little tongue in cheek, but I can't say how often I've recently seen people advance this counterfactual argument that people would simply be scandalized if males were as scantily clad as females are in games/media of various sorts.

The simple reality is that there is no shortage of male characters, prominently featured, in gaming, films, etc, that are (at best) half-dressed. This really struck me when I was arguing about a recent change in World of Warcraft, and I pointed out that the final boss of the most recent expansion (Warlords of Draenor) is... basically wearing a spiked jock-strap.
Behold, Archimonde in his (lack of) finery;


Archimonde is successor to another shirtless dude as end boss, Garrosh (end boss of Mists of Pandaria);


Yes, he is in fact wearing a pair of tusks as a shirt. Prior to Garrosh there was a dragon made of lava and the Lich King, the only example of a sensibly dressed male final boss of any expansion in WoW's history. The boss of the first expansion being either Illidan, a shirtless, tattooed elf/demon/emo hybrid (or Kil'Jaden, who is basically shopping at the same store as Archimonde above);


Of course it's not just WoW: one of the most popular and recognizable figures from gaming in the last decade is Kratos, a man who is basically wearing a towel and an an angry disposition.


This brings me back to what I thought was the real point of this thread: it's not about the nudity, it's about the art just not looking right. I mean look above at the picture of Archimonde: he's basically wearing exactly what the (not) Obliterators are wearing, it's just that it doesn't work aesthetically. Though the Oblits are actually growing on me, to be fair.

Rule 1 is important to the forum, abide by it

I'm sorry, I like tits. if it were not for the batting average, I'd honestly add some of the girls here to my IG/ Inquisitor forces....

HA, a Zardoz reference, awesome! "The gun is good. The penis is evil..."

 plastictrees wrote:
Product criticism is part of....producing things. Anyone that produces sub par garbage gets called out for it, that's Dakka.
Glad you're here to White Knight for them though, poor little company needs protection from all these potential clients expressing their opinions.

Dont get me wrong I am definitely not a fan of the 18+ range and of course stating your opinion is is expected but then there is just being plain rude, there us this thing called constructive criticism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Theophony wrote:

overtyrant wrote:
Prodos have been very restraint and with how they have been treated here I wouldn't be surprised if they posted here ever again, it's this Artemis Black fellow [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS] and the very fact he has been allowed to carry on the way he has been speaks volumes about this forum. For shame Dakka and Mods for shame.

Rule 1 has been mentioned a bunch, and has been followed pretty well. The attacks have been about quality of work, not about people. If you want to exercise your right to vote with your wallet, then do so, both ways. Buy from the one you like and don't buy from the other. I live in America where we have the right to criticize work, but we can also be held accountable for it when we cross the line. Artemis has said his views on the product (I have many of the same feelings about the quality of work, but I am not an artist, so it doesn't hold the weight). I will buy from HFminis because most of their stuff is tasteful or at least has a concept to it, this is just gratuitous for the sake of shock and awe.

Stating your criticism is perfectly fine and I to live in the free world were such a thing is allowed and expected but he was beìng plain rude and going on like a broken record. There was no constructive criticism from him whatsoever, just attacks against Prodos. Could of just stated his opinion and voted with his wallet and not go on and on and on, in fact most of this thread could've been handled like it but has been left to go unchecked.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
You'll be needing coherent male sculpts for it fo actually feel like an integrated force. How about something like this:

Spoiler:

Too tame, maybe? Guess it needs legs/arms protection, though.

To be consistent with the rest of the range presented here, I believe they'd have to modify the original design from a diaper to a thong in the back. I believe the aerodynamics of that are better for riding the inevitable dirt bike motorcycles. I also believe they'll have to add much more additional padding along the front of the diaper so that the level of beefcake matches the previously presented cheescake.

Not to be persnickety, but when I see comments like this (of the form "if only the had male figures in such a scandalous state of undress..."), I can't help but think... "where have you guys been?"

Not to say that Zardoz is unknown. But one scarcely needs to go back to 1974 to find examples of action heroes with little in the way of clothes (fun fact, Sean Connery's costar in Zardoz? Best Lead Actress Oscar Nominee Charlotte Rampling.)

This is a classic argument that I will argue against with an equally classic one: when females are portrayed with little clothing, they are almost always meant to appeal to the heterosexual male. When males are portrayed with little clothing, they are almost always meant to appeal to... the heterosexual male. Not as a sex object, but as an aspirational power fantasy. Obviously that hilarious Sean Connery is an exception (probably made for comedic effect more than anything? I haven't seen the movie), but generally this holds true. The WoW characters and Kratos are a perfect example; they are made to look awesome, not sexy. So when you say "men are often portrayed without clothes as well" you are strictly correct, but that portrayal is not comparable.

 Grot 6 wrote:

overtyrant wrote:
Prodos have been very restraint and with how they have been treated here I wouldn't be surprised if they posted here ever again, it's this Artemis Black fellow [MOD EDIT - RULE #1 - ALPHARIUS] and the very fact he has been allowed to carry on the way he has been speaks volumes about this forum. For shame Dakka and Mods for shame.

Don't kid yourself, Chief. Prodos has received a gracious ovation, compared to how they treat their consumers. As for Artemis, he's been more then reasonable, in light on the point to target of pimping a game of superpower armor, with tits

Quite reasonable? So I could come over to your gaf, take a leak all over you walls, dump in your bed and you will say 'thats all right it's reasonable'.

I'm not a fan of these miniatures and I feel Prodos can do a lot better but to state over and over again that your product is gak and have nothing constructive to say is just plain rude, if you feel that way state your opinion, vote with your wallet and then leave. Or add a constructive argument.

Gamingdog wrote:

 JamesY wrote:
... the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby.

I feel I'm missing something? did you just say Reaper Miniatures released a miniature with an exposed anus?

Searching the Reaper site for 'anus' only returns Anushka, Female Fighter

yeah...I need to know what the reaper Sophie reference is. I own a few sophies and ...i recall no "anus"

Link/explanation?

Reaper is known for their nude models, if nothing else they are the company who publicly said that when they make a model with a nude version, a scantly clad and a full clothed version they numbers they sell are in this order from more to less.

And you know what, that is ok, they provide things the market wants and they do not make a fuss when others do the same.

I do not care for the product been offered by Prodos here, but since it has been mentioned again, Prodos has shown physical models, multiple times some a few pages ago too, so accusing them for showing renders is false, also this is not a kickstarter.

Now for me Artemis behavior is more than offensive Calling another business a liar and demanding proof of sales numbers to back a statement is to me at least unheard of and his attacks on the "tastefulness" (subjective) of the product and the quality of the product (subjective?) are questionable since his company produces the same thing essentially, scantly clad or nude male and female figures in sexualised poses and illogical attire for the task at hand.

Also a company that creates "not (name of not their IP character)" models should not criticize somebody for acquiring the mane Space Crusade and utilizing it.

On the later subject I will have to agree with the OP and ask is GW completely incompetent on these things and managed to not get it once MB left it slide away?

Why would they? "Space Crusade" wasn't their name, they still have the control of the 40k setting and the visual representation of that, and I don't think they're planning on doing a new version of the boardgame.

I understand it was never their game, they just licensed the IP, but it was a big gateway game for the customer base that made them that big so it has an iconic status on their veteran base (that admittedly they do not accept they exist) so it should be logical to try and keep the product name in the company.

Logic?

Gamingdog wrote:

 JamesY wrote:


... the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby

.

I feel I'm missing something? did you just say Reaper Miniatures released a miniature with an exposed anus?

VorpalBunny74 wrote:

Gamingdog wrote:

 JamesY wrote:
... the reaper Sophie with an anus made me think twice about re-entering the hobby.

I feel I'm missing something? did you just say Reaper Miniatures released a miniature with an exposed anus?

Searching the Reaper site for 'anus' only returns Anushka, Female Fighter

rayphoton wrote:yeah...I need to know what the reaper Sophie reference is. I own a few sophies and ...i recall no "anus"

Link/explanation?

Don't really want to have to draw more attention to this model, but as it's hard to even find a picture of, never mind the model, here you all go; http://www.miniature-giant.com/2010-nude-convention-sophie-urban-legends-limited-edition-dis-Reaper-Special-Edition-SE-sku-1507-pr-13087.html

I remember seeing a paint job with a purplish skin tone and wondering what had happened to miniatures whilst I'd been gone.

I would like the Terminators if their armors did not have all those very unnecessary holes. Actually, if there was an armored version for all the Sisters of Battle stuff, I would be interested.
As for my opinion on the “sexy” ones, well, everyone that does not know me already can guess it from my sig I guess.

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Obviously that's a little tongue in cheek, but I can't say how often I've recently seen people advance this counterfactual argument that people would simply be scandalized if males were as scantily clad as females are in games/media of various sorts.

The simple reality is that there is no shortage of male characters, prominently featured, in gaming, films, etc, that are (at best) half-dressed.

Maybe, just maybe, a shirtless male character that is ugly but extremely muscular (like basically all those you used as example, incidentally) is not there for titillation but to portray strength and savagery. Here is a good rule of thumb for you: if the only “sexualization” you can find about a male character can also be interpreted as showing physical strength, chances are extremely high that it actually is all about showing physical strength. If the camera lingers on his barely-covered butt, then you may have a point. And case in point, people ARE scandalized when there is a male character with the same kind of ridiculous “sexy” clothes in a video game.

 JamesY wrote:

Don't really want to have to draw more attention to this model, but as it's hard to even find a picture of, never mind the model, here you all go; http://www.miniature-giant.com/2010-nude-convention-sophie-urban-legends-limited-edition-dis-Reaper-Special-Edition-SE-sku-1507-pr-13087.html

I remember seeing a paint job with a purplish skin tone and wondering what had happened to miniatures whilst I'd been gone.

Oh..I've seen that before. It doesn't really have a "anus" but is still quite nude..so yeah ..

Not for nothing but what a pretty paint job....That's a really well done face.

$300
Pull the other one.....

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I'm actually more likely to put my money toward a company that has staff who stand against the blatant nonsense of others.
I also very much doubt the majority of people tutting and admonishing Arty were lining his tills to begin with.

Actually, I do.. ! They make cracking miniatures, struggle to think of another company that does such a wide range and so many characterful sculpts. Will hit them at Salute this year as I have in previous, although was pointing out that others might not feel the same way.

I personally find all of this (the mini style etc.) amusing rather than disheartening or offensive, although in defense of Arty I haven't spent a professional career sculpting and understand we all feel differently about these things.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Maybe, just maybe, a shirtless male character that is ugly but extremely muscular (like basically all those you used as example, incidentally) is not there for titillation but to portray strength and savagery. Here is a good rule of thumb for you: if the only “sexualization” you can find about a male character can also be interpreted as showing physical strength, chances are extremely high that it actually is all about showing physical strength. If the camera lingers on his barely-covered butt, then you may have a point. And case in point, people ARE scandalized when there is a male character with the same kind of ridiculous “sexy” clothes in a video game.

Obligatory:

 =Angel= wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Maybe, just maybe, a shirtless male character that is ugly but extremely muscular (like basically all those you used as example, incidentally) is not there for titillation but to portray strength and savagery. Here is a good rule of thumb for you: if the only “sexualization” you can find about a male character can also be interpreted as showing physical strength, chances are extremely high that it actually is all about showing physical strength. If the camera lingers on his barely-covered butt, then you may have a point. And case in point, people ARE scandalized when there is a male character with the same kind of ridiculous “sexy” clothes in a video game.

Obligatory:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/qPnk0C7.jpg[/ig]

I don't know if you agree or disagree with that picture on the right, but it's quite a ridiculous argument. No one would ever argue that sexualization of men aimed at heterosexual females doesn't exist, it obviously does. The difference is how prevalent and mainstream it is. Do you see men like that in every movie, every commercial, every magazine, every ad, like you do women? No, you don't. They are there, but the power fantasy version is MUCH more common, again unlike women. That comic on the other hand is spot on.