DuskRaider Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 This is something that has been brought up before, and most recently in the recent LI Ad Mech announcement thread: The marked difference and decline in quality of detail and proportions in GW / FW models over the years. The best examples I have are the following and some of the most obvious… I remember when FW first released the Horus Heresy series. It was filled with beautifully crafted, detailed and intricate pieces who were not only correctly proportionate when compared to their other lines (Death Korps, Elysian, etc.) but fit a lot into that scale. Armor pieces were realistically scaled and detailed. Here is a great example: This is the very first Power Armored Praetor to be released by Forge World, over a decade ago by now. This is an exquisitely detailed model. This is what we get now: I used this picture not only because it’s my favored Legion so I’ve kept track of this stuff more, but also because this is literally a resin FW model. The details have been oversimplified, things like armor trim are now chunky and cartoonish, and the overall design has gone from proportionate and realistic to a more… I don’t know, the only word I can really come up with is childish. Here are some even better examples, and these are before FW was more or less dissolved as an independent entity and rolled into the GW main fold. It’s the ones I think of the most when I talk about this… I don’t know, dumbing down? of the design philosophy: the original Death Guard Cataphractii pauldrons. These were available separately from the GW Cataphractii models and there were other Legions available as well, I believe mostly from the first FW black book (Betrayal). Observe the detail and how it’s proportioned to the model it’s intended for. These are the 2.0 version of the Death Guard Cataphractii pauldrons, also released by FW. These may have been intended for the GW Cataphractii Terminators, but the point still remains. The details and proportions (I will be using that word a billion more times it seems) are way off. Small details like the rivets have suddenly become massive and unrealistic while the iconography has lost a lot of its intricate detail when compared to the original version. Another great example is the vehicle doors. Mind you, these again were both designed and released by FW proper before their dissolution. The first release of the Death Guard Rhino doors. Again, these came out around the release of Betrayal, over a decade ago. The detail is fine and realistic, the proportions are great and everything just feels more natural. This is version two and another example of a massive disparity in quality, detail and realism. The small details such as on the iconography are now gone. Everything is chunkier and void of any real depth or realism. The proportions seem exaggerated like on the other 2.0 releases. What are folks’ thoughts on this. I can’t be the only one who has noticed the difference and, in my opinion, massive dip in detail, proportions and realism in not only Horus Heresy but the entire 40K range in general when compared to older models. Let’s hear your thoughts. DemonGSides, Matcap86, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf and 6 others 2 6 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrion Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 It's a bit of a double edged sword. Building and painting the newer forgeworld stuff is far better than the older stuff, IMO. For instance, Dark Angels Interemptors vs Emperor's Children Palatine Blades. For me and my talent level, the older stuff might have slightly better defined aspects, such as wings and mail links, but painting them felt like a chore compared to the more plasticky feel of the newer resin. I can't quite explain it - like the folds in the cloth or gaps between wings wouldn't take paint as well, or the gold trim was too think for my clunky ability. I remember the discussion about the HH librarians robes and the thickness of them, as though they are wrapped in a duvet or winter blanket rather than a stately cloth, and it's right. Sevrin Loth looks better than the newer Librarians by quite a distance, but his axe is bendier and more prone to damage, as are the older EC weapons, close combat weapon kits and so on. You're definitely right about the doors though. There wasn't a single faction that had improved doors second time round. The skull on the crux terminators land raider doors was probably the best thing I'd ever seen at the time. SvenIronhand, DuskRaider, skylerboodie and 1 other 4 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067234 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lay Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Old FW was a place for veteran designers to work on passion projects. You know, niche stuff that didn't need to sell, or had no proper place in a balanced game (like flyers and super heavies at the time). This meant all models were labors of love. Modern FW is much more integrated into GW and meant to supplement their games more meaningfully. There's also stuff about old Fw that I didn't like. In the early years most of their stuff was made for Imperial Guard players (since most of their designers are treadheads) and once the Heresy took off under Alan Bligh it became Space Marine central (slowing down even the Imperial Guard releases) . From what I understand the restructuring (and subsequent drop in quality) happened after Bligh's passing, since the team wasn't able to maintain the FW range that had grown considerably under him on their own. Personally my favorite old FW pieces were the original Land Raider and Rhino doors. The Legion symbols on the doors were 1:1 copies of Wayne England's art. They just ooze character. SvenIronhand, roryokane, Dr_Ruminahui and 7 others 6 4 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067236 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Old FW was a place for veteran designers to work on passion projects. You know, niche stuff that didn't need to sell, or had no proper place in a balanced game (like flyers and super heavies at the time). This meant all models were labors of love. Modern FW is much more integrated into GW and meant to supplement their games more meaningfully. There's also stuff about old Fw that I didn't like. In the early years most of their stuff was made for Imperial Guard players (since most of their designers are treadheads) and once the Heresy took off under Alan Bligh it became Space Marine central (slowing down even the Imperial Guard releases) . From what I understand the restructuring (and subsequent drop in quality) happened after Bligh's passing, since the team wasn't able to maintain the FW range that had grown considerably under him on their own. Personally my favorite old FW pieces were the original Land Raider and Rhino doors. The Legion symbols on the doors were 1:1 copies of Wayne England's art. They just ooze character. Pretty sure a lot of old guard left before Bligh passed away, so it wasn't so much that he grew the range of units they produced, he just happened to be the one holding the roof up at the end. Warwick wrote most of the books, and Tony Cottrell stopped being in charge at some point to go head Warhammer World. Respect to Alan though. Not saying he didn't have a massive contribution. As for the range in general, it was fairly diverse. There are lots of kits people just forget existed. Makes you really roll your eyes when anyone goes "They're probably going to remake it in plastic" to every second thing that leaves. Orks aircraft traktor kommandos bike nobz bike warboss armoured trukks various big guns half trakks big trakks grot tanks grot mega tanks grot bomb kill bursta tanks kill krusha tanks stompa upgrades dread upgrades, fighta bombers, warkopter, squiggoth, gargantuan squiggoth battle wagon gun wagon battle fortress looted rhino Tau Tetras Remoras Hammerhead turrets Turrets Sensor towers Heavy gun drones Piranhas (including a rail rifle variant) Skyray Manta Tigershark Barracuda XV9 Various XV8 upgrades 2 unique commanders Ta'unar 2 Riptide variants Orca Broadsides Greater Knarlocs Knarloc Riders Eldar Falcon Type 2 Hornet Wave Serpent Skathach Knights Lynx Cobra Scorpion Warp Hunter Night Wing Wraith Seer Avatar Phantom Phoenix Bomber Vampire Irillyth Shadow Spectres Corsairs Wasp Revenant Chaos had a decent amount of stuff as well, but you get the idea. The fact I can list 60+ kits, (not including weapon variants) without touching Guard or Marines, counts for something. roryokane, Dark Shepherd, Gamiel and 6 others 6 3 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067248 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostwanted Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 For me, the detail seemed to drop off when the models went to being designed using CAD rather than hand sculpted. I loved the detail on the older stuff but the newer releases seem a better quality of finish. It now has almost no issues with mold slip, no air bubbles and general smoothness of the details and resin being better. The newer stuff looks more aesthetically similar to the plastic stuff it goes along with. Avf, roryokane and Helias_Tancred 1 2 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067252 Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkhorse0607 Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 (edited) It now has almost no issues with mold slip, no air bubbles and general smoothness of the details and resin being better. I wouldn't go that far, I get that on average it might be better, but I got a Tybalt Marr 2 weeks ago that was so badly cast I'm just going to use it in kitbashing rather than painting the full model because it is so mangled that I don't have the patience to basically greenstuff half of the model around all the trim (and they said no to a return because I had already washed it) For me the issue comes down to a few things. We aren't going back to the days of hand-sculpting, as much as I wish they would. I don't think there's any comparison between models as intricate as Jenetia Kroles (hand-sculpted) and many of the new characters or Praetors/characters. Yes they have come close, particularly in ranges like the Dark Angels, which are the best example I can use of newer sculpts that feel like the older Heresy stuff, or at least feel Forgeworld, but even then it's not quite there. They have gotten better, I think we are done with the days of the Night Lords Praetor and Angels Tears when the transition first happened, I hope it catches up but time will tell 1) Having more purposeful detail. A lot of the older minis aren't that intricate, but the detail that was there felt impactful for the range. For example, the Emperor's Children. Objectively, the older sculpts aren't that detailed. But the detail they did have felt balanced and done well enough that it felt appropriate. In comparison, you have something like the Ultramarines power armor Praetor that is so covered in stuff that it feels cluttered, some of it I've questioned why it's there like the trim bordering the torso and the model in general would make Fulgrim blush with the amount of gold on it. I guess my driving point is the older stuff feels like there's intentional placement of extras like trim or embellishments, and the new stuff (again not all of it) is just "look how much detail we can put" 2) Characterization in general. FW doesn't seem to care much about the units/characters matching what they should be anymore. For example, even if you don't like the sculpts, when you read something about Khârn, Eidelon, Tyhon, or Erebus and you go look at their models you could see that it's intended to be those characters. In comparison, Argel Tal is known for his silver mask and custodes weaponry, but has neither of them, realistically, you could pass him off as any possessed for the Word Bearers, albeit a tall one. Death Guard are renown for their lack of embellishment on their armor, but the praetor as shown before is covered in it which completely doesn't match the rest of the DG range. The are other examples but this is already getting long I dunno. I still like the 30k stuff, but I'd say it's more hit or miss for me than it used to be. I wish they'd actually finish things once and a while but I guess that's off-topic for here *edit. Bring back the scenic bases you cowards. If you're going to charge $56+ for a character model at least bring back the base since you discontinued doing the boxes Edited September 28 by darkhorse0607 DuskRaider, Avf and Cenobite Terminator 3 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067259 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 I wouldn't go that far, I get that on average it might be better, but I got a Tybalt Marr 2 weeks ago that was so badly cast I'm just going to use it in kitbashing rather than painting the full model because it is so mangled that I don't have the patience to basically greenstuff half of the model around all the trim (and they said no to a return because I had already washed it) For me the issue comes down to a few things. We aren't going back to the days of hand-sculpting, as much as I wish they would. I don't think there's any comparison between models as intricate as Jenetia Kroles (hand-sculpted) and many of the new characters or Praetors/characters. Yes they have come close, particularly in ranges like the Dark Angels, which are the best example I can use of newer sculpts that feel like the older Heresy stuff, or at least feel Forgeworld, but even then it's not quite there. They have gotten better, I think we are done with the days of the Night Lords Praetor and Angels Tears when the transition first happened, I hope it catches up but time will tell 1) Having more purposeful detail. A lot of the older minis aren't that intricate, but the detail that was there felt impactful for the range. For example, the Emperor's Children. Objectively, the older sculpts aren't that detailed. But the detail they did have felt balanced and done well enough that it felt appropriate. In comparison, you have something like the Ultramarines power armor Praetor that is so covered in stuff that it feels cluttered, some of it I've questioned why it's there like the trim bordering the torso and the model in general would make Fulgrim blush with the amount of gold on it. I guess my driving point is the older stuff feels like there's intentional placement of extras like trim or embellishments, and the new stuff (again not all of it) is just "look how much detail we can put" 2) Characterization in general. FW doesn't seem to care much about the units/characters matching what they should be anymore. For example, even if you don't like the sculpts, when you read something about Khârn, Eidelon, Tyhon, or Erebus and you go look at their models you could see that it's intended to be those characters. In comparison, Argel Tal is known for his silver mask and custodes weaponry, but has neither of them, realistically, you could pass him off as any possessed for the Word Bearers, albeit a tall one. Death Guard are renown for their lack of embellishment on their armor, but the praetor as shown before is covered in it which completely doesn't match the rest of the DG range. The are other examples but this is already getting long I dunno. I still like the 30k stuff, but I'd say it's more hit or miss for me than it used to be. I wish they'd actually finish things once and a while but I guess that's off-topic for here *edit. Bring back the scenic bases you cowards. If you're going to charge $56+ for a character model at least bring back the base since you discontinued doing the boxes Can't say I've had the same experience. I have had to deal with CS once but they just sent out replacements - no questions. And that's with buying over 100 minis from them. Did you wash it in Iso or something? As for digital sculpting being the problem, I really don't see it. We don't really know who's sculpting what anymore, and unless we can confirm that the previous artists produce worse sculpts with a different medium, I'd say the issue still is with the sculptors or art direction, not the medium. Plenty of great sculpts have been digital. Like all of the Sol Aux range (original) and Perturabo etc. As well as newer ones like Lady Haera. There are bad sculpts (like the trash librarian) but they really aren't consistent. Don't get me wrong though, I still love hand sculpted stuff. Oxydo, DuskRaider and Avf 2 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067263 Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkhorse0607 Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Can't say I've had the same experience. I have had to deal with CS once but they just sent out replacements - no questions. And that's with buying over 100 minis from them. Did you wash it in Iso or something? No just in dish soap, this is actually my second mini I've had them either kick back or say no to a return for. I will say that's very much the minority before I've had issues with kits and they've sent out entire replacement packs for just a damaged jump pack, so I'm not saying CS is bad by any means I'd say the issue still is with the sculptors or art direction, not the medium. That's very much a fair point, and I completely agree with it Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067273 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 (edited) It’s not anything insidious, they switched from Mark and Sam et al sculpting everything by hand specifically crafted for resin casting to CAD. The loss of detail purely came from there. People in the Trench Crusade and 3D printing community are running into this issue as well. You can print a highly detailed model, but when you start to cast it to sell you’re rebuilding the mold every few weeks and the masters break down so you’ve gotta reprint those, then there’s new problems with each mold iteration, and on and on and on. I’ve bought four of the resin praetors you posted from the initial heresy release and while each is detailed each has also had an entirely new problem to fix (one leg slip, one chest bubble, one head bubble, one backpack slip) the CAD resins reauently have minor slips but the cartoonish thickness of the parts seems to stop the fiddly errors I was always having to correct before assembly. As much as I miss the old detail I vastly prefer the upscale and ease of prep. kind of like fast food. Nowadays it sucks and isn’t as good as even 20 years ago, but it’s still convenient Edited September 28 by Marshal Rohr Gamiel, Helias_Tancred and Aarik 3 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067274 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuskRaider Posted September 28 Author Share Posted September 28 I think I had QC issues once or twice with FW products and whenever it popped up, I reached out and they would send an entire model to replace even something as small as a miscast arm or what have you. Mind you, at one point I had multiple armies that were almost entirely FW products like the Vraksian Renegades, a massive 30K army, multiple Chaos armies, etc. Cleaning off the resin film could be time consuming but it was well worth the effort. It’s honestly sad to see their sculpting quality go down and while I’m sure CAD rendering plays a part in it, I think design philosophy is more to blame. It seems that FW hit a point where things like scale, detail and realism were cast off or deemed less important than a more high fantasy, over exaggerated art style and it’s a shame because it not only clashes with the older style but it feels lesser IMO. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067277 Share on other sites More sharing options...
grailkeeper Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 I've thought that as modelling technology advances this lets GW have more detailed models. This isnt always a good thing. Simpler models are easier to paint, particularly for children. Obviously this doesnt apply to advanced ranges like forgeworld, but there is something something to be said for simplicity. A detailed model painted well looks incredible, but painted badly looks far worse than a simple model painted badly. Gamiel, skylerboodie and Redcomet 3 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067278 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SvenIronhand Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Simpler models also provide more of a canvas for freehand and sculpting or what not. grailkeeper, Gamiel, Redcomet and 1 other 1 3 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067280 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuskRaider Posted September 28 Author Share Posted September 28 While this is true, I do think that there should again be a clear distinction between GW and FW models. While it will be interesting to see GW tackle something like Death Korps of Krieg, their models leave a lot to be desired when compared to the now defunct FW line which was magnificent. We won’t even get into other things such as the death of other great product such as the FW Realm of Battle tiles and their terrain. By blurring the lines between GW Main and FW, it seems as though it is the Specialist Games side that has suffered the most, both through support and model quality. While I don’t expect the mass produced models for HH to have the high level of detail as they used to when under the care of FW, I do expect specialty kits such as characters and Legion-specific upgrades to maintain the old standard. Like I said, it seems as though the current design philosophy started before the dissolution of FW as an independent entity, but I just can’t wrap my head around why they would do so or how they don’t expect people to recognize the drop in quality (especially as actual prices for these models rise). darkhorse0607, roryokane and Avf 1 2 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067281 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrion Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 I think it's a deliberate choice to move more towards the look of plastic models to maintain uniformity because there is now so much plastic available for the range. Like the Death Guard praetors look like they could be plastic to my untrained eye, but the Space Wolves look like crap resin, interemptors look like plastic but phoenix terminators look resin, the new librarians look plastic but sigismund looks resin. Even within the same range it differs - the Emperor's Children Terminator Praetor looks a world away from the Phoenix Terminators, so too Reavers and Ashurhaddon. But all the newest ones look 'better' when placed alongside the recent plastic units and characters because the miscellaneous details are in sync - piping, chains, skulls, scrolls, feathers etc. In the older design model, all those extras were better defined, and they look amazing, but they also look different now up against the same details on your plastic rank and file. skylerboodie, DuskRaider and Gamiel 2 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067282 Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadlessCross Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Old FW was a place for veteran designers to work on passion projects. You know, niche stuff that didn't need to sell, or had no proper place in a balanced game (like flyers and super heavies at the time). 1. Please don't pretend 40k was any better balanced in prior editions, because it wasn't. 2. Like 3 FW units were actually broken at that time, and guess what? It wasn't the flyers and giant walkers. Oxydo, Redcomet and Avf 1 2 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067284 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 (edited) It’s not anything insidious, they switched from Mark and Sam et al sculpting everything by hand specifically crafted for resin casting to CAD. The loss of detail purely came from there. People in the Trench Crusade and 3D printing community are running into this issue as well. You can print a highly detailed model, but when you start to cast it to sell you’re rebuilding the mold every few weeks and the masters break down so you’ve gotta reprint those, then there’s new problems with each mold iteration, and on and on and on. I’ve bought four of the resin praetors you posted from the initial heresy release and while each is detailed each has also had an entirely new problem to fix (one leg slip, one chest bubble, one head bubble, one backpack slip) the CAD resins reauently have minor slips but the cartoonish thickness of the parts seems to stop the fiddly errors I was always having to correct before assembly. As much as I miss the old detail I vastly prefer the upscale and ease of prep. kind of like fast food. Nowadays it sucks and isn’t as good as even 20 years ago, but it’s still convenient Ease maintaining moulds maybe, but not from CAD. Solar Aux were CAD in 2014. Plenty of other models too. You can't say they have chunky details. It's a conscious design choice, regardless of CAD. Edited September 28 by Orion Oxydo 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067286 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 Resin Solar Aux were a [redacted] nightmare to work with. On par with Krieg but somehow more fiddly. The result was phenomenal but it was not something everyone could do. Solar Aux is a great example of exactly what I mean about the new way they design stuff in CAD, with much larger and thicker cartoon proportions. Look at the Solar Marshal and then at the Champion. CAD designed, you could easily print a billion of him to the same quality with a good printer. His cast was NORTORIOUSLY hit or miss with the braiding having bubbles, the tassels having bubbles, the sword bending back after heat treating, and on and on. So new Solar Marshal if done in resin will likely have that Minecraft body look a lot of stuff has now specific to reduce casting issues. CAD design is the catalyst for this shift from fiddly to robust. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067287 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamiel Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 What is CAD? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067291 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SvenIronhand Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 What is CAD? Computer-aided design. Think, like, the professional version of the old LEGO Digital Designer app (for people of a certain vintage). Ramell, ZeroWolf, Gamiel and 1 other 1 1 1 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067294 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Eye Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 There has definitely been a homogenization of the aesthetics between FW and GW "proper". I personally don't much care for it, but I do understand the argument that the more hyperdetailed stuff was a faff to paint. Or at least, I would if modern GW plastics weren't so plastered with added knick-knacks and tiny details that painting them was even more of a chore. Personally my biggest irritation with the loss of FW as its own thing is the death of Imperial Armour and the cool quasi-historical, highly detailed stories that went with them, along with the cool units and models they introduced that were more niche than would justify a full plastic kit. I noticed the XV9 Hazard suits got the chop recently, very sad about that; those were really cool models. Ramell, Orion, Matcap86 and 7 others 1 9 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067326 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blindhamster Posted September 28 Share Posted September 28 so, proportions on the old praetor weren't good, or particularly close to the art imo. however, the details were exceptional and it was indeed also one of my favourite forgeworld models. the new chap just sort of sucks... yeah. I don't think they're all so bad though. The blood angel praetors I really like, imperial fist one is also very good imo. The detail isn't quite so intricate, but its still very nice on them. I do think some of the classic forgeworld models were so wildly different in design style that they just looked wrong in armies (but were good as display pieces). A lot comes down to designers skillsets and tools used, there's been a big shift to CAD, which has its benefits, but it definitely kills some of the "soul" of a lot of models. It allows for corner cutting and honestly I'm not convinced that all the "sculptors" they have anymore are really sculptors, so much as technicians given briefs. A lot of the classic forgeworld (and gamesworkshop) stuff was made by true artists, some still is, but clearly not all. Marshal Reinhard 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067336 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted September 29 Share Posted September 29 Resin Solar Aux were a [redacted] nightmare to work with. On par with Krieg but somehow more fiddly. The result was phenomenal but it was not something everyone could do. Solar Aux is a great example of exactly what I mean about the new way they design stuff in CAD, with much larger and thicker cartoon proportions. Look at the Solar Marshal and then at the Champion. CAD designed, you could easily print a billion of him to the same quality with a good printer. His cast was NORTORIOUSLY hit or miss with the braiding having bubbles, the tassels having bubbles, the sword bending back after heat treating, and on and on. So new Solar Marshal if done in resin will likely have that Minecraft body look a lot of stuff has now specific to reduce casting issues. CAD design is the catalyst for this shift from fiddly to robust. Krieg are a nightmare to work with? I wouldn't say so. And I don't see their detail causing issues. Not to mention, Sol Aux were two piece models. Meanwhile new Solar Aux and Tech Thralls are both 14 pieces each, for guardsmen size models. GW clearly don't worry about models being fiddly for heresy. Personally I think it just comes down to a change in artists. DemonGSides 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067345 Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Praetorian of Inwit Posted September 29 Share Posted September 29 I love the new Death Guard Praetors. For me personally they are 10/10 models aesthetically. Avf, Gamiel and armarnis 1 1 1 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067370 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lay Posted September 29 Share Posted September 29 1. Please don't pretend 40k was any better balanced in prior editions, because it wasn't. 2. Like 3 FW units were actually broken at that time, and guess what? It wasn't the flyers and giant walkers. Balanced was perhaps the wrong word. What I meant is that the game wasn't designed with such units in mind. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067396 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherrypie Posted September 29 Share Posted September 29 Handsculpted FW models have a whole lot of character and artistically chosen detailing that many modern models can lack, but lets not pretend they had good proportions. All marine models of old have horribly mangled proportions and look like child soldiers with drooping gorilla arms. Individual parts, great. As a whole, not so much. My old FW Deathshrouds looked like angry spherical barbeque grills on two legs before I sculpted them new abdomens to fit at least a bit better alongside the rest of my true-scaled legionaires. Special Officer Doofy and BitsHammer 2 Back to top Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/384096-disparity-of-design-philosophy-in-games-workshop/#findComment-6067456 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now