Official WarSeer Finecast Poll.

[EmperorNorton]

I buy models because I like to work on them. I don't want to just paint it, I want to work with it. Sometimes that means converting it, sometimes that means just cleaning it up and fixing it up. Bringing it to a higher standard. For me, that hands on working with the model IS the point. It is the experience. It is the thing that appeals to me. More so than the game sometimes and the appreciation of the finished product is directly related to the work that goes into it. You call it "broken" and I can appreciate your reasoning, but to me, the term "model" means it is unfinished, unrefined, and base on which on build and refine. To me, expecing a model to be perfect is like expecting that multipart kit to come assembled.

I am willing to smash all new miniatures you buy with a hammer for a small charge, to increase your enjoyment of your purchase.

[chamelion 6]

I am willing to smash all new miniatures you buy with a hammer for a small charge, to increase your enjoyment of your purchase.

You should really try avoiding caffine and other stimulants for awhile. Maybe try yoga or meditating. Deep breathing exercises might help relieve some of that excess tension.

I've found bicycling an excellent way to work off hostility and tension and it has some excellent health benefits.

[loveless]

*shrugs* No worries, just differing view points I suppose.

I prefer assembly and painting to playing and I'm no stranger to pinning, green-stuffing, and kit-bashing. Heck, I think the only Marines I own that aren't uniquely posed or altered are the horrible ones from AoBR...and even those I smoothed and cleaned the shoulder pads on.

I simply take no joy in fixing holes or trying to resculpt filigree/runes/what-have-you. If the picture of the Necron Overlord has a Necron Hieroglyph sculpted onto his chest, then that hieroglyph needs to be there in full - not half there. Likewise, if a model has toes on the picture, it needs to have toes when I handle it (toes are easy enough to sculpt/fix, but I still get the "I paid how much for this?" feeling if I have to fix something like that).

If I plan on converting it anyway, it's a wash. My Finecast Succubus had the hilt/crossbar/whatever on her halberd bubbled away into nothingness. I was going to swap it out for a different weapon-head anyway, so it didn't matter to me. Were I not going to replace it, I would have gotten a replacement. I can fix these things, but I shouldn't have to fix these things.

And I think that's what it breaks down to: Some people may be insane (jk ) and like fixing "broken" models - and that's fine. However, we - as customers - should not be required to fix these models.

In your case, you can alter your models from an "as seen on package" level to whatever you want in much the same way you can with a "broken" model. Take my Succubus example - if you planned on replacing the weapon head like I did, it wouldn't have mattered if the original halberd was in pristine condition or missing the entire blade - the end result would have been the same.

Consider, though, that someone would want the halberd to look like does on all of the GW stock photos. GW shouldn't force people to rebuild the blade because they can't get the resin bubble-free or what have you. Modifying the model should be a choice, not a requirement.

I expect to be able to assemble the models as show on the box/blister without anything more substantial than gap-filling or barrel-drilling. GW wishes to be considered a supplier of premium products, and that's what I expect out of a premium product.

[major soma]

I've had no problems so far with Finecast and yet I know a few peeps who have bought the same models and have experienced bubbles, moulding issues. Its a hard call.

[Druchii Monkey]

No but the product should relate DIRECTLY to the marketing statements, advertising standards are pretty stringent on this, so are trading standards .......... or so they told me on the phone.

You are clearly confusing something such as Lynx/Axe deodorant "associating" their product with a lifestyle (i.e. smell nice and you could get nice and/or more women) what they clearly DON'T do and would NOT be allowed by law to do is to directly state that using their deodorant WILL give you more women, this is where GW marketing is wrong. They make several, rather over the top, DIRECT CLAIMS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THEIR FINECAST PRODUCT, claims which the product doesn't meet, as such they are in breach of advertising law if they continue to sell such a product knowing it is flawed (again verbatum from Trading Standards). As for things like toothpastes they have to be tested to actually do what they say (even if it's only to a lesser degree) or that to would be against the law.

Yes, but Finecast per se is not flawed. There are instances of it that are. If GW were in such blatant breach in the way you say, they would have been slapped on the wrists heavily by Trading Standards by now. I can't really say any legal conclusions (UK law) can be drawn from your brief conversation, and i'm not really sure either you or i are qualified to do this.

And please tell me you didn't start talking to Trading Standards about the "Moon Landing" thing because that would have just been Lynx ad territory.

not when those claims are breaking advertising standards, i.e. claiming to be of a higher standard than anything else on the market, and clearly not being so.

In UK law i would imagine that whether they are or not is not for you to decide, it is for the relevant standards authority. Whether simply claiming to be of a higher standard is enough is also best interpreted with a proper understanding of the regulations. It may require that they actually compare themselves against something else specific or a competitor and say they are better for there to be a breach.

So depending on the particular regulations that apply in UK law you may be dealing with something such as this.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...ulation/5/made

Particularly note the characteristics of the product that are judged as relevant under section 5.(5). e.g. benefits of the product; fitness for purpose of the product. I'm not sure the name of the product is in there, and i'm not sure GW are pushing the boundaries in other respects for there to be a breach in other areas. I'm not a lawyer.

In most respects i think this is a fair representation of the product by GW as a class:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/co...?aId=16800012a

Also, having checked the White Dwarf that came out with Finecast can't see any reference to "Moon Landing".

They say "Nothing less than a new age in wargaming. This month Citadel Finecast is unleashed upon the world and your hobby will never be the same again. Andy Hall explains..."

'"The detail and definition are nigh-on perfect and that is very satisfying as a designer." - Aly Morrisson.' - that's a little misleading maybe but out of context.

I also find the fact that none of the pictures in that issue of White Dwarf have any flash a bit misleading but not sure that is enough?

[Greatwood]

i bought a samael on a jetbike finecast and the bike is miscast. its like half of it slipped during the process, and the book that is supposed to go on the front has a bubble that looks like it took a bolt gun shot.

not worth it for 50 bucks. i wish they just went all plastic.

[chamelion 6]

i wish they just went all plastic.

I agree with ya completely. I prefer plastics too and GW has had plenty of time to work the problems out. But I understand that GW simply hasn't the facilities to to go all plastic so we're stuck with some kind of alternate media for the time being, at least.

Given that, I prefer FC, even with the teething problems, to metal, which I've never had much love for as a modeling media.

[Zinge]

This pretty much sums it up for me

http://www.akaranseth.com/blog/quest...onclusions.htm

[spaint2k]

i bought a samael on a jetbike finecast and the bike is miscast. its like half of it slipped during the process, and the book that is supposed to go on the front has a bubble that looks like it took a bolt gun shot.

I'm jealous. I must confess that half the reason I ordered one was the nasty little hope that it'd be miscast in some major way, allowing me to get a replacement (the other half of the reason being that I was trading it with my friend for a metal one).

Unfortunately it looked really good and the minor problems with it will be much less hassle for my friend to fix than the most minor of clean-up on the metal miniature (vent lines, for example).

[Dæmon]

Heres my recent "fine cast"
So where is the crisp detail?
and the parts circled red must be intended...

Dark Eldar, note to invest in moth balls

Oh baby you so fine you so fine you blow my mind

[ihavetoomuchminis]

This pretty much sums it up for me

http://www.akaranseth.com/blog/quest...onclusions.htm

This pretty much sums it for me too. I couldn't agree more with his (or her) conclusions.

[Misfratz]

I buy models because I like to work on them. I don't want to just paint it, I want to work with it. Sometimes that means converting it, sometimes that means just cleaning it up and fixing it up. Bringing it to a higher standard. For me, that hands on working with the model IS the point. It is the experience. It is the thing that appeals to me. More so than the game sometimes and the appreciation of the finished product is directly related to the work that goes into it. You call it "broken" and I can appreciate your reasoning, but to me, the term "model" means it is unfinished, unrefined, and base on which on build and refine. To me, expecing a model to be perfect is like expecting that multipart kit to come assembled.

Hmm. I also like the assembly of models. I like to get to know it, and I don't mind too much that it involves some work.

However, if I had the ability to sculpt my own models I would do that. I don't. So I pay GW for one of their talented sculptors to create models for me that they faithfully reproduce in a suitable material. Unfortunately, I don't find that finecast is a suitable material, and will not accept being told to fix errors in the casting process - eg large bubbles, large numbers of small bubbles, thin parts having holes, etc - that essentially do a grave disservice to the skill of the sculptor who created the model. If I was a sculptor for GW I'd be outraged at what finecast does to my work.

I won't ever buy finecast again. I'm a bit sad that this means there are some excellent models that I will never be able to collect, but there are a lot of good models in plastic which have been well cast, that I will console myself with.

[iamfanboy]

This pretty much sums it up for me

http://www.akaranseth.com/blog/quest...onclusions.htm

I liked how he actually showed some GOOD Finecast pictures in the end, one of which is a kit I was curious about its potential in Finecast - the Lilith Hesperax.


The reason that the internet's motto is 'pics or it didn't happen' is because it's all too easy to claim anything over the internet. The fact that I'm typing this on my solid gold keyboard with my gargantuan manhood while a half-dozen nubile concubines curl 'round me to make sure I lose no precious body heat is proof of that. Perhaps it's just the way I'm using a 52-inch ultrathin LED TV as a monitor that let me see the number of unacceptable problems, or maybe it's my near-superhuman keenness of observation which has led to so many cases solved by me personally...

Naw. The flaws are there, plain to see; and even though the internet is the repository of exaggerated complaints the sheer number of them coming from people who were until recently rabid pro-GW fanbois kinda clues me in that finecast becoming finecrap is not uncommon.

Naturally, though I have the skills to resculpt even the nastiest of missing details, my investigations and concubine-related duties afford me little extra time to do so - and my girls are far too clumsy to trust with more than the cleaning of flash, talented as they are otherwise.

Dammit, is that the phone ringing AGAIN? Okay, where's my clean cape and cowl....

[Druchii Monkey]

This pretty much sums it up for me
http://www.akaranseth.com/blog/quest...onclusions.htm

Yeh this is a great article covering the issues with Finecast for one particular model, and covers the sort of experience that a number of other people are having, it's not an angry rant, it shows a flawed product and makes a fair point.

But... what it is not is a balanced view of Finecast in general, or a review of Finecast. One good picture and a good word about GW customer services does not make it such. It's specifically geared towards criticism - fair enough.

Here is an alternative article to look at:
http://www.totalwargamer.co.uk/blog/?p=1342

It is not as in-depth as i would like but it at least considers pros and cons.

The reason that the internet's motto is 'pics or it didn't happen' is because it's all too easy to claim anything over the internet.

Ever heard of Photoshop? ..and i'm sure there are plenty of pics of good Finecast.. e.g. the GW web site (hardly impartial i know), but there are plenty of other places - just Google it.

I liked how he actually showed some GOOD Finecast pictures in the end, one of which is a kit I was curious about its potential in Finecast - the Lilith Hesperax.

She was just awesome in metal - hard to imagine Finecast could make her any better but worth a look.

[75hastings69]

You read in that 2nd link that bubbles may be deep within the model? That is worrying! surface ones can be seen and dealt with if you want but internal errors could easily compromise the structural integrity of a good looking cast, it's yet another thing to worry about.

However I want gw to sort finecast as I prefer resin to metal and yes it does have advantages, for example I have 2 wyverns that are heavily reposedand "flying" with very little contact required with the base because of the extremely lightweight nature this would not have been possible with metal, well without very heavy pinning and some magic and having to compromise the posing. It's just at the moment the disadvantages outweigh the benefits by a long way, which is a real shame. GW should have done much much more about the issues BEFORE releasing such a flawed product for sale to the public, it COULD have been a huge success, instead it's pretty much been divisive of the hobby community with some people actually leaving the hobby as they feel GW motives for the product are purely about £ and to hell with the hobbyists! I don't think that's the full story (although its certainly part of it!) but I feel it's been so badly implemented that it might actually damage GW reputation long term, but I guess only time will tell.

One think for certain is we ate not getting a superior product (in most cases) that we were promised, maybe in the future that will change but the pessimist in me thinks that the current standard is as good as we're going to get and GW will again rely on the head in the sand till everyone is desensitised to the issues routine.

[EmperorNorton]

Also, having checked the White Dwarf that came out with Finecast can't see any reference to "Moon Landing".

Could somebody else look that up, please? And ideally give the number of the issue as well as the page?

[chamelion 6]

Could somebody else look that up, please? And ideally give the number of the issue as well as the page?

Why is it important? I'll take your word for it. Who's miniatures do compare to a moon landing? What do miniatures have in common with a moon landing to compare? It's just advertising hype.

However I want gw to sort finecast as I prefer resin to metal and yes it does have advantages, for example I have 2 wyverns that are heavily reposedand "flying" with very little contact required with the base because of the extremely lightweight nature this would not have been possible with metal, well without very heavy pinning and some magic and having to compromise the posing. It's just at the moment the disadvantages outweigh the benefits by a long way, which is a real shame. GW should have done much much more about the issues BEFORE releasing such a flawed product for sale to the public, it COULD have been a huge success, instead it's pretty much been divisive of the hobby community with some people actually leaving the hobby as they feel GW motives for the product are purely about £ and to hell with the hobbyists! I don't think that's the full story (although its certainly part of it!) but I feel it's been so badly implemented that it might actually damage GW reputation long term, but I guess only time will tell.

One think for certain is we ate not getting a superior product (in most cases) that we were promised, maybe in the future that will change but the pessimist in me thinks that the current standard is as good as we're going to get and GW will again rely on the head in the sand till everyone is desensitised to the issues routine.

It's not putting your head in the sand... It's a different mindset.

Do you remember the old 4th or 5th edition multipart Chaos Knights? If GW were to put those on the market now people would wail in rebellion. Yet there was no outcry at the time. Why? because people accepted them as the standard. Stunted half metal, half plastic hybrids that looked silly and were poorly molded and casted. It took years to move from that to what we have now. As much as I think GW currently is the master of plastic game miniatures, it wasn't always the case.

Something new has to start someplace. GW's early metal modes were not so wonderful as people seem to remember them. Their plastics were plain with little detail and in stiff stilted poses.... The stuff people are holding up as wonderful became wonderful because it was allowed time to evolve. It didn't start that way, not even close.

It is unrealistic to demand that something new, like Finecast, suddenly enter into the mix already highly evolved... And the option of just sticking with the metals because they are already highly evolved is fine, but it's unlikely to evolve much further. Sometimes the next step doesn't always look like a step forward. I FC evolves only half as much as the metals and plastics over the next couple of years it's going to make metal models look shabby and it's going to be a huge step forward for modelers. FC has huge potental, metals are never going to be much more than they already are.

Sometimes you gotta take a risk if your gonna progress...

[75hastings69]

I can agree with most of that C6, but i still strongly feel finecast shouldn't have been released to the public in its current state, a few more months testing and sorting out issues would have been beneficial to everyone.

[winterdyne]

I think what's pissing people off is precisely that it's been released 'before it's evolved' as you put it. It's like killing your pet monkey in favour of an amoeba. 'Cos y'know, amoebas will evolve.

[Sgt John Keel]

It is unrealistic to demand that something new, like Finecast, suddenly enter into the mix already highly evolved...

I'm happy Boeing doesn't think that way.