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.

There's a blob of purple from the cable on the pipe on the first one too. I mean I'd be happy if I'd painted them, but I'm a darn beginner and bad at painting.

I just don't get why FW is even allowed to use such artwork considering the investment that GW makes in them to produce those models.

I mean something just seems really off about the whole thing and as if there's either some internal drama/conflict going on that we don't know about; some alternative sensible reason or just rank ignorance and lack of skill. Heck it might even just be that FW is locked into a contract for a period of time with someone who turned out not so great and they can't break the contract for some reason

 Galas wrote:
The best part is that the guy has a black dot in the inner part of his cape. Like... is a marketing product. At least fixs something like that.

That's probably a button hole.

Baxx wrote:
Who/what is that?

Bag Man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toXMdCazsnM

I'm sure the models look better in person and without a thick coat of paint on them, but what's with the bounty hunter's gun? It looks pretty poorly sculpted. It's all rough and uneven looking. If it was an underhiver, you could try and defend it. But he's not some common scum.

GaroRobe wrote:
I'm sure the models look better in person and without a thick coat of paint on them, but what's with the bounty hunter's gun? It looks pretty poorly sculpted. It's all rough and uneven looking. If it was an underhiver, you could try and defend it. But he's not some common scum.

It's a Needler, the one he has looks the same as the other depictions of it:

The butt of the needler is what's bothering me. It looks like it's a needler that came from a bad quality finecast model. It looks rough and unfinished

I like the blob guy because it's a good representation of what it's meant to be: A genetically created inbred mutated bit of psychic nightmare fuel that is only scarcely human that can hardly function on its own. Weird choice for a Bounty Hunter, to be sure, but still, the model represents what it is perfectly. Just needs a proper paint job.

The other psyker... well I bought him when he was still a Renegade Psyker, so hooray something I don't have to buy.

Mr. Powdered Wig is nifty. He could be good in all sorts of places (wonderful Rogue Trader character for the RPGs).

Someone put this on Facebook:

Yeah, I don’t get the hate for the blob; a human reduced to a piece of meat solely to serve the needs of the Imperium is about as 40k as it gets.

 Jadenim wrote:
Yeah, I don’t get the hate for the blob; a human reduced to a piece of meat solely to serve the needs of the Imperium is about as 40k as it gets.

People don´t like fugly models. And that one is as fugly as it gets.

That's gotta be the ugliest mini I've seen...why would anyone pay for a pile of crap.

Question one - Do you think Ratskins wil be coming back?

Question 2 - I'm sure this has been gone over ad nauseam, but i just don't know the answer...

Why are the FW paint jobs always so awful? I mean they are not just bad, they are amateur, at best.... why?? They really dont do the models justice... often i've looked at the FW photos and thought the model was average, then i see it raw, no paint job, and its an incredible sculpt.

Its not just the technique, its also the colour choices... always so muddy and dull. Very strange,

Anyway... i know you guys probably have an answer to this... i'm just a noob. Please help a guy out.

FTL

they've said the ratskins and other 'second wave' gangs aren't where they're going next, but never say never so even if the do them they're not going to be for at least another year or two

and yes FW have decided to go for distinctly low level paint to illustrate their necromunda stuff sadly

I can see them testing the waters with a single sculpt for Ratskins first, as a gun for hire or the like.

Would be fun if they did an updated version of MIGHTY Brakar.

I think in part they want to explore the Guilders as something new for Necromunda as they are extremely varied in appearance and also let GW release more one-off model designs rather than multipart forces like the gangers.

 BrookM wrote:
I can see them testing the waters with a single sculpt for Ratskins first, as a gun for hire or the like.

Would be fun if they did an updated version of MIGHTY Brakar.

I think your right, I think that is exactly what they are doing with squats, we had one that im told sold like crazy, now we are getting a new one, give it time and I honestly think we will get a gang.

I’d like it if their first new ratskin was sold as a Dome Runner or similar hanger-on. Maybe a ‘premium’ dome runner you can only find if you pass a high rare trade roll or something.

 fasterthanlight wrote:
Question one - Do you think Ratskins wil be coming back?

Question 2 - I'm sure this has been gone over ad nauseam, but i just don't know the answer...

Why are the FW paint jobs always so awful? I mean they are not just bad, they are amateur, at best.... why?? They really dont do the models justice... often i've looked at the FW photos and thought the model was average, then i see it raw, no paint job, and its an incredible sculpt.

Its not just the technique, its also the colour choices... always so muddy and dull. Very strange,

Anyway... i know you guys probably have an answer to this... i'm just a noob. Please help a guy out.

FTL

Dull colours aren't inherently bad and can be made very interesting while retaining a more realistic look than the high contrast GW studio schemes, they're just poorly executed on current FW releases.

Everyone knows at this point to check the resin pics when deciding whether to buy.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the paintjobs by everyone ripping on the ForgeWorld miniatures.

 Dr Mathias wrote:
I'm really looking forward to seeing the paintjobs by everyone ripping on the ForgeWorld miniatures.

Why? Several of us (myself included) already noted we are not great painters. IT doesn't matter what our painting skills are; we can 100% hundreds (if not over 1000) of high quality painted models on the GW webstore. That's sort of the point, its not just the quality of the painting its the big contrast between the FW painting at present and the GW painting considering that they all happen in the same company on the same site and go through the same photography studio.

 Dr Mathias wrote:
I'm really looking forward to seeing the paintjobs by everyone ripping on the ForgeWorld miniatures.

I can’t paint for toffee, but I’m not painting to try and show new models off in the best light.

Yeah, people is pointing out the bad quality of this paintjob in the context of a marketed product to the masses. You are supposed to show your product in the best way possible.

For a tabletop standard those are above average. In my opinion at least.

 Galas wrote:
Yeah, people is pointing out the bad quality of this paintjob in the context of a marketed product to the masses. You are supposed to show your product in the best way possible.

For a tabletop standard those are above average. In my opinion at least.

Are they above average? I wouldn’t claim to know what average looks like, but they look pretty poor to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dr Mathias wrote:
I'm really looking forward to seeing the paintjobs by everyone ripping on the ForgeWorld miniatures.

Do you have to be able to paint better than someone else to have an opinion on their painting?

If it helps then yes, I do think my painting is better than these latest FW examples. I’m not saying the guy is a terrible painter though. They look to me like they were painted to far too tight a deadline.

At least they are above my average

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

Do you have to be able to paint better than someone else to have an opinion on their painting?

Of course not, we all already know the answer to your own question.

I have painted miniatures professionally for Wargames Factory and Hydra Miniatures to be shown in printed materials, web marketing, and displayed physically at trade shows. I fully understand the benefits of displaying well-painted miniatures in order to sell them. The comments, to me anyway, are overly critical of these paintjobs which in my humble opinion aren't obscuring the underlying miniature enough to dissuade a significant number of people from buying them.

 Dr Mathias wrote:
The comments, to me anyway, are overly critical of these paintjobs which in my humble opinion aren't obscuring the underlying miniature enough to dissuade a significant number of people from buying them.

No probably not. I do think the painted miniatures look much worse than the unpainted resin, but I think most people know to look at the resin too.

Another thing I should mention is that I think GW in general appears to have a policy of not 'going to town' on their miniatures because at one point a while back there was some criticism from the public that the paintjobs were not being truthful regarding the surfaces. I personally don't like the open smooth surfaces seen on many recent GW plastic releases, but the studio paintjobs aren't hiding the nature of those surfaces. I spoke with some GW folks a few years ago about the studio painting and they had restrictions laid down on contrast levels etc, for no other reason that they needed to suit the way they photographed the miniatures.

If I recall correctly there was a vampire that the studio painted to look like the Coppola version of Dracula with the muscled armor, and people bought it and discovered that the armor wasn't sculpted with the muscle texture (not talking about Mortarion or whatever his name is). In that case the wonderful skilled painting was not ideal for marketing.

From a marketing perspective I can see why GW doesn't show Golden Daemon level painting. People working on technique can see an achievable benchmark to strive toward, top tier painters can visualize their own technique and interpretation. Skilled painters can take an 80s mini that looks like it was sculpted with bubblegum and make it look good, so do they really care what the studio paintjob looks like?

Maybe we should take this discussion to a topic of its own and leave this one for Necromunda news peeps!

Ambots and 40mm bases next week . Pity there's only 1 base design but at least it's a cheaper way of getting 40mm industrial bases.

It's about time. Been waiting for these impatiently ever since the preview.

Depending on the price, must-buy for me, don't play the game, but still kinda sorta want them.