# Is the quality of Games Workshop's models deteriorating?



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

I mean in the visual sense.

I have been nothing but dissappointed by the latest model releases, including the butt ugly Daemonettes, the horrible Bloodletters and the SILLY plastic Tyranid Raveners.

I'm glad they're making lots of different awesome big vehicles like Baneblades and the Orky Stompa, but I don't think they should just give the go signal on a clearly inferior mini like the above.

What do you think?


----------



## Alex (Jan 19, 2008)

I've been a little dissappointed by some of their recent models, especially the bloodletters. They are the reason I'm turning some kroot I was going to sell, into a khorne force instead of buying the models GW have provided for them.


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

I cant help but have mixed feelings on the matter. The new Necrons are, in my opinion, leagues better looking than the old-school Necrons, but some of the new models look a little... Not as good. Theres no succinct word to describe the new models. They aren't horrible, not by a long shot. But it seems appearances are going down in some regards. I cant help but disagree on Daemonettes however. They _are_ Daemons, you know. And by Daemon standards they're pretty hot.


----------



## KarlFranz40k (Jan 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> I have been nothing but dissappointed by the latest model releases, including the butt ugly Daemonettes, the horrible Bloodletters and the SILLY plastic Tyranid Raveners.
> 
> I'm glad they're making lots of different awesome big vehicles like Baneblades and the Orky Stompa, but I don't think they should just give the go signal on a clearly inferior mini like the above.
> 
> What do you think?


WTF? Raveners are metal you tool!:angry: I'm going to disagree with you entirely, deamonettes and bloodletters are a huge improvement on the old plastics. And as for the "SILLY" Raveners, they would easily be in my top twenty favourite models:victory:

Have you seen the new Chaos Knights? The AoBR Warboss and Captain? Chaos Possesed? That new Empire Mad Count model? The Ironclad dred? All the planetstrike terrain kits? Okay there have been a couple of turkeys like Vulken H'stan and the Punisher Russ, but apart from that you're talking absolute nonsense.


----------



## El Mariachi (Jun 22, 2008)

Well sure, some models do suck such as the daemonettes but to be honest, the models that suck are far out numbered by the pretty awesome releases of late. To be honest, I've looked at a lot of models out there and to be honest, Games Workshop are producing some pretty great things....having said that, they do think too much of their models and they are not worth what they charge (it's quite shocking how little I spend these days).

If I had to say one thing against model quality, I've noticed that the capes/cloaks/etc of recent models have a very odd, flat look to them now that they're sculpted via computer (for example, the necromancer on the corpse cart amongst others). Other than that though, can't really complain!

Edit: What plastic Tyranid Raveners? They're metal and the current ones are quite nice!


----------



## pigmonger (Aug 1, 2009)

I have most of the new space marine models listed in the codex that just came out (if you want to talk about new ones), and they're extremely well done. Although, they did get to use existing models and just tweak them a bit for the most part. But I am very impressed. I just put together an ironside dreadnaught, and that is a sexy sexy model.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

KarlFranz40k said:


> WTF? Raveners are metal you tool!:angry: I'm going to disagree with you entirely


Slow down, mister flamethrower!

Whether or not they are plastic or tin, the old raveners are a million times cooler and more tyranid-like than the new ones, I mean *come on.*

*New Ravener:*









*Old Ravener:*









And maybe the reason I didn't know they were tin, is that I would never touch something that foul!



KarlFranz40k said:


> And as for the "SILLY" Raveners, they would easily be in my top twenty favourite models:victory:


You *SURE* you're not talking about the old ones??



KarlFranz40k said:


> daemonettes


How daemonettes should look:









How female mutated cultists should look:









Either you misunderstood my post completely, or we just have diametrically opposed opinions, and in the latter case, *you shouldn't flame people.*


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

New Ravener reminds me of a Hydralisk.

Daemonettes actually look like demons, not legged fish with boobs. I like the Deamonette models.


----------



## Holmstrom (Dec 3, 2008)

pigmonger said:


> I have most of the new space marine models listed in the codex that just came out (if you want to talk about new ones), and they're extremely well done.


Yeah, my models are great too but the Space Marines are the most heavily developed in the WH40k franchise. I haven't seen a lame model for Space Marines, although one or two may exist, but the only problems I've seen are poor quality of some kits I've purchased. My Land Raider for instance had a lot of warped parts. After a while trying to bend it all back in to shape it is still a little...off...but only barely so.

Newer armies and such are often neglected for a time before any changes are made to improve them. And considering the SM's sell like crazy you'd expect them to give them more attention if they bring in the money.


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

First off, the old Raveners looked like crap. Sorry, but they do nothing for me, aesthetically.

Secondly, the "new" ones aren't _that_ new.

I do prefer the old Daemonettes, but the new ones aren't exactly the end of the world.

Don't get me _started_ on the Ork Range, where with one or two exceptions, every new model has been a hellacious improvement.


----------



## KarlFranz40k (Jan 30, 2009)

Apologies for flaming. And I've never seen that deamonette model you posted, which isn't half bad but was that the quality of the old ones? I think not.

Now about the Ravener, you haven't ever examined/held one, so how can you really make a judgement on it? Here's my verdict, the main talons are thick and strong looking, similar to mole claws, how is that retro modlel ment to dig with those ridiculous big things? The new one has a more dangerous, snake-like face, while I'd die laughing if that grin came at me in a dark alley. While the old one has a longer tail, it is too thin and makes it look like a glorified worm, the new one has a shorter tail that curls round presenting a barb with which to impale its prey.

Anything you want to add?


----------



## Talos (Aug 4, 2008)

KarlFranz40k said:


> And I've never seen that deamonette model you posted, which isn't half bad but was that the quality of the old ones? I think not.


That is a old daemonette model I think it is the 3ed one. I quite like the 2ed ones with the extra large claws.
The ork range has gotten alot better over time.


----------



## KarlFranz40k (Jan 30, 2009)

Talos said:


> That is a old daemonette model I think it is the 3ed one. I quite like the 2ed ones with the extra large claws.
> The ork range has gotten alot better over time.


Is it? My bad, the only other deamonette models I'm familiar with are the triple-tits/fish looks ones. 

Aye the ork range has went from a joke to possibly the most handsome 40k army.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

the answer to the original question is a huge resounding NO,i have yet to see a plastic kit in the last 3 years that does not totally over shadow the metal models it replaced, some of the kits like chaos knights,dark elf,lizardmen and the recent empire model look like they will walk off the table.
I have to say that the old ravener always looked like he had gimpy claws and a stupid comedy grin.


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

Speaking of which, I really hope they start phasing out more metal models and implementing more plastic ones. I like the plastics much better due to the fact that they often come in many more pieces than metal models do, which leaves a lot of room for posing units and plastic makes it so much easier to dice parts up with a razor saw to repose limbs if you want. Plus plastics are invariably cheaper than metals for obvious reasons.


----------



## El Mariachi (Jun 22, 2008)

Yep that daemonette came out with the chaos 3.5 codex which in my opinion, saw the best releases (model wise) for chaos (although I wasn't fond of the Gary Morley bloodhounds)


----------



## shas'o7 (May 17, 2008)

Some new models may not have been an improvement (I like the old ravener) but you have to look at the big picture. Almost every new plastic kit they've come out with has been as good as or better than the older ones. I'm very excited to see what they'll come up with when they re-design Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar, if they ever get round to it. The new ork range is fabulous, and I've been so enticed by the new plastic IG kits (command squad, baneblade variants) that I've decided to start a guard army.


----------



## NerdyOgre254 (Jul 16, 2008)

Iron Angel said:


> Speaking of which, I really hope they start phasing out more metal models and implementing more plastic ones.


Sisters are still probably a bajillion years away though.

Still, look at the old Obliterator models, as compared to the newer ones. *shudder*


----------



## Asmodeun (Apr 26, 2009)

old obliterators "WOW! that thing has a rocket for an arm!"


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

I can kind of see how it might look like GW is losing some quality. They aren't-- other companies are just catching up, which makes GW stuff look less impressive than it used to. Privateer Press is getting closer and closer to matching GW's quality, while maintaining their own distinctive style, and independent sculptors and small companies (such as those who sell their goods on CoolMiniorNot.com) also are closing the gap. GW stuff is still a cut above the rest, but it's not as far ahead as it once was.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

I actually think the general appearance of models is getting better. However they are taking the feel of the models in a new direction one that old school gamers often oppose.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

i like the new ravener model better, heh sorry man!

but yeah GW likes to change its models up form time to time and we will have our differing opinions on the way they look it seems. some of us seem to prefer keeping the good ol "classic" look and others seem to like a newer, sleeker version....like differing tastes in cars! haha.

i hope the new dark eldar models next year ( assuming no date push backs of course) look nothing less of pure badass and kickass combined as i already liked the way the warriors and ravengers and such looked. i know most people will prob say, "how could they make DE look any worse?" lol.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

LukeValantine said:


> I actually think the general appearance of models is getting better. However they are taking the feel of the models in a new direction one that old school gamers often oppose.


I think you forgot to mention the great forgeworld death korps...the only models that are getting worse (At least when they show in the mail) a local guy bought a bunch and the hands had no fingers (Thus they became plasma gunners)


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

And another case of "Newer is better"; Look at the old metal Carnifex:









And the "New" plastic one:


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

If I'm not mistaken, that's Old One Eye.

But yeah, I agree on most Tyranid units except the Raveners. Old Raveners just look more awesome, especially the head and scyhing talons.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> If I'm not mistaken, that's Old One Eye.
> 
> But yeah, I agree on most Tyranid units except the Raveners. Old Raveners just look more awesome, especially the head and scyhing talons.


Bah!
I always hated them, they look ridiculous.
Like big junkies, on the prowl for their next fix :laugh:

Anyway, about the Daemonettes.
While yes, the old ones may be more aesthetically pleasing , It's not exactly what they're supposed to be.
Daemonettes have ways of changing their appearance to a subject, they make themselves appear as the most beautiful creature ever to exist.
In reality, they're Daemons, and thereby prone to hideousity.

Why don't people like the Bloodletters?
I think they look wicked, so much better than the old metals.
Sure the head is a bit silly, but so what? They're great quality, the whole thing looks appropriately menacing, and they have HUGE swords!


----------



## Baalirock (Oct 6, 2008)

I agree that overall, GW's quality appears to be increasing. While I'm not a fan of the plastic Daemonettes or Corsairs, most everything else has come leaps and bounds above its predecessors. The new Orks are what got me back into 40k after a 5 year gap. 

Plus, the jump from mostly metal to mostly plastic cannot be understated. Plastic kits are usually cheaper, which makes it easier on the wallet, and makes it easier for new player to enter the hobby. New players = more money for GW = better models for all of us in the long run.

Now, if those rumors flying around that GW is looking into releasing a few "Best of" metal minis from the past, that would be the best of both worlds! :mrgreen:


----------



## rokar4life (Jun 21, 2008)

why the f*ck would you use the metal revener models, its just a warrior with a longer tail. all you have to do is roll up some green stuff, and stick it on


----------



## Talos (Aug 4, 2008)

I just put together and paint 5 of the Ork stormboyz. This was the first time I have seen these models in person and I must say they are amazing. There is a lot of detail on the bodies and the rockets. There are also tons of nice extras and the heads and very detailed.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

Talos said:


> I just put together and paint 5 of the Ork stormboyz. This was the first time I have seen these models in person and I must say they are amazing. There is a lot of detail on the bodies and the rockets. There are also tons of nice extras and the heads and very detailed.


If you want Detail go look at the great detail on the all Mighty......

GENESTEALER!!! (There isn't any)


----------



## Cypher871 (Aug 2, 2009)

I think the debate is a subjective one, it's impossible to please everyone. I personally like a lot of the new plastic models (even ones I don't collect) but equally loathe some of them over their predecessors.

For example, the old metal Striking Scorpions, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers were fantastic in my view...the plastic ones all need melting (ughhh!). On the flip side, the new Dire Avengers and Guardians are lovely, and for every person that agrees with me there will be an equal number that disagree.

Kit quality keeps getting better and better, the detail more intricate and the kits bigger and bigger. Unfortunately they will never fully do away with metal models because of the cost. 

You may notice that only models that do not sell large quantities are cast in metal now. This is because it is cheaper to produce the mold for a metal figure than its equivalent plastic model. 

They do not sell enough of these models to make the kind of profit they do on squad kits for example so it makes sense not to produce them in plastic...its a shame and a reality...the plastics are better then their metal counterparts by far!


----------



## TerranRaida (Jul 28, 2009)

i havent noticed any decrease in quality...


----------



## torealis (Dec 27, 2006)

The problem, as pointed out, is that this is an entirely subjective debate. 

What i think can be conclusively said that detail wises, option wise, and pure talent wise, the sculpting of models has never taken a step down. Whether you like the new letters or not, theyre a hell of a lot more detailed, customisable and intricate than their predecessors.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Cypher871 said:


> I think the debate is a subjective one, it's impossible to please everyone. I personally like a lot of the new plastic models (even ones I don't collect) but equally loathe some of them over their predecessors.
> 
> For example, the old metal Striking Scorpions, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers were fantastic in my view...the plastic ones all need melting (ughhh!). On the flip side, the new Dire Avengers and Guardians are lovely, and for every person that agrees with me there will be an equal number that disagree.
> 
> ...


plastic Striking Scorpions, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers do not exist, mores the pity.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

bitsandkits said:


> plastic Striking Scorpions, Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers do not exist, mores the pity.


IF they did my eldar army would be over 20k by now lol!


----------



## Cypher871 (Aug 2, 2009)

I stopped playing Eldar many moons ago :laugh: so don't actually know what lines they have released in plastic...I just know I don't like the look of the current Reaper, Scorpion and Dragon models.


----------



## Graf Spee (Apr 29, 2009)

well, as for tyranid carnifexi:

the screamer killer was the thing to go for me. the face is the purest moral destroying evil.










even though this neat and clean paintjob makes him look like a sissy.


----------



## Cypher871 (Aug 2, 2009)

Yeah, I had the Screamer Killer and hybridised it with plastic claws and bio-weapon from the plastic nid warriors when they came out...looked pretty cool actually.


----------



## Graf Spee (Apr 29, 2009)

Cypher871 said:


> Yeah, I had the Screamer Killer and hybridised it with plastic claws and bio-weapon from the plastic nid warriors when they came out...looked pretty cool actually.


sounds cool. should post a pic then.


----------



## Giant Fossil Penguin (Apr 11, 2009)

I bought the RBT01 box when it was released, then I stopped the hobby until about 5 years ago. Every couple of months, almost like clockwork, I find myself in my local GW and talking about how the quality and detail of the models has increased, even in just these last 5 years. Certainly, you'll get the odd poor mould,such as the Thunderfire Cannon which still looks good but it a bit crap to put together, but that will happen with any production process. And then, as with the Daemonettes, there will be a change in design direction as they look for a different aesthetic.
Any change will, inevitably, have some folk who say it was for the worse; the models and kits that GW release continue to improve as they push forwards with the plastic moulding technology; there will always be disgreements about what looks best, but, as far as I feel, this talk of degradation of quality is more about aesthetic than anything else. My $0.58.2

GFP


----------



## marcch (Apr 1, 2008)

This is a subjective thread owing to many personal tastes. I must, however, state that I believe they are getting much better overall. In addition the plastic kits are easier to kit bash if you really want to change stuff a bit.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

rokar4life said:


> why the f*ck would you use the metal revener models, its just a warrior with a longer tail. all you have to do is roll up some green stuff, and stick it on


While this may be true.
I have yet to see a converted Ravener from Warrior that didn't look like shit.
The Ravener model is good, it's a quality model with plenty of detail (although there should be variation in the tail).


----------

