PDA

View Full Version : Anatomy - some (scary) individual will have knowledge



BattleofLund
08-02-2010, 01:01
I.e. the anatomy of the Minotaur muscle set-up!

Like many, I instinctively shied away from the look of the new Mino's legs. It seemed impractical with a muscle wrapped in front of the shin. But I know little of anatomy, and cannot explain why exactly it's not. After all, the human thigh has some verging-on-diagonal muscles - obviously this is needed for a fully functioning leg. Why couldn't a Minotaur body (specifically it's legs) have a need for unusual configurations?

So, in short: could you of greater anatomical erudition (won't ask where or why you have it :)) explain to me, and maybe some other interested members, why the Minos look like they do (or why they should not)?

Lord Dan
08-02-2010, 01:14
Minotaurs look the way they do because they're mythological creatures. As you put it, there is something wrong with their legs by standards of what we view as natural human construction, but who's to argue they're wrong when we're talking about make believe monsters.

For all we know the extra muscle you mentioned isn't part of their musculature at all. Maybe it's a wolverine-like spike that juts out when they knee their opponents. Maybe it's a machine gun.

They're just terrible models- weird muscles or not.

ChaosVC
08-02-2010, 02:25
I just have a look at the plastic minos close up, theres really very little to complain about it, perhaps the leg looks weird but overall, its a decent model, I am probably buying three and use chaos-orges rules for them and give them mark of Khorn in my WOC army. They should have chains binded to their legs and hands to allow them a good degree of freedom to swing their great axe! Whoohoo!

Verm1s
08-02-2010, 03:08
Minotaurs look the way they do because they're mythological creatures. As you put it, there is something wrong with their legs by standards of what we view as natural human construction, but who's to argue they're wrong when we're talking about make believe monsters.
Me.

They're 'mythological' but the concept is still flesh-and-blood creatures based on types very familar to humans - i.e. humans, and cattle - that're subject to some kind of environments and laws of physics that make most of the Warhammer world relateable to our own. Verisimilitude (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verisimilitude) - say it with me. Nothing wrong with make-believe monsters but they look a lot better when they look like real make-believe monsters. This is why your brain jumps up and down and makes woop woop alarm noises at the sight of these particular examples, although a bit of anatomical knowledge (like wot BattleofLund is looking for) helps to figure out why. Ideally only a weekend citybreak in the Realm of Chaos or a warpstone binge session should earn you a get out of jail card for wacky nonsensical anything-goes physiology, and then I could still argue there's a difference between disfiguring mutation and plain bad sculpting.

So there.


Maybe it's a wolverine-like spike that juts out when they knee their opponents. Maybe it's a machine gun.
:eyebrows: Second big word for today: rationalisation.

BattleofLund: those weird diagonal bits seem to be an effort to represent the tibialis (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tibialis.png). But I can agree with Dan that it's terribly done. I'd point out more but I don't remember much other than the hoof-slippers. I haven't looked in a while and I'm not eager to look again.

BattleofLund
08-02-2010, 03:38
BattleofLund: those weird diagonal bits seem to be an effort to represent the tibialis (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tibialis.png). But I can agree with Dan that it's terribly done.

Thanks for the info and link Verm1s. That muscle actually seems to (feels to) cross the shin? Much further down on the shin, and lesser in size at that point though.

Would the Mino arrangement make them, dunno, better at football or anything? Or rather, common kicking?

Witchblade
08-02-2010, 04:17
I was going to say exactly what Verm1s said about verisimilitude. I've argued for that so many times now it's reassuring to see someone else say the same thing.

Edit: Also, as someone professionally knowledgeable about human anatomy, I can say that the minos are endorsed with many muscles that serve no realistic function.

Example: the diagonal muscle running over their shins would indeed correspond with the human tibialis anterior, used primarily as a dorsi-flexor (toes to shin movement). As dorsi-flexion moves against the resistance of the weight of the foot only, the tibialis needn't be large, certainly not comparable to or even larger than the calves that lift the entire body all day.

Additionally, the origin of the minos' tibiales seem more lateral on the tibia, while the point of insertion seems to be more medial on the tarsal. This would indicate the minos inverse their feet/hooves greatly, which makes no sense, especially not for hooves.

What does this make minos better at? Er... looking at the soles of their hooves in lotus position... remaining standing when confronted with a force from the side (although less from the front/rear).

TITAN
08-02-2010, 04:36
The muscles on the front of the shin participate in dorsiflexion and rotation of the foot, or hoof in the case of a Minotaur.

thechosenone
08-02-2010, 04:38
I'm part of the school of thought that, no matter what you tell me that jerky strap in on their leg the overall model is walking throw up.

The placement of the hair is stupid and uniform, the faces are ok and at the same time none really bull like. The poses are all boring and the horns are strange.

I'm sure that in person and not with a paint scheme that highlights their genetic deformities they may look better. Am i encouraged by what i seen to seek out if they look good, not really.

I don't play beast men but i think the reason that i'm so offended by these models is that they were really looked forward to at least by people i know. Its an expensive metal model that is released as a three model plastic box. It was a cool thing for lots of people and instead its a thing they have to question if they even want.

As far as the muscles, i mean, i was a certified EMT-B and the little bit i know about muscle is that it looks like muscle and its more or less what the pictures in my text book looked like, kinda sorta. But that's not the point. Skin hides most of that. The legs look like they belong on a clive barker cenobyte and not a real creature.

End Rant.

Seville
08-02-2010, 05:24
:eyebrows: Second big word for today: rationalisation.

Third big word for the day: pedantic



Edit: Also, as someone professionally knowledgeable about human anatomy, I can say that the minos are endorsed with many muscles that serve no realistic function.

No realistic function? Darn it, that does it. I am returning mine. You mean these little plastic toys can't actually walk?


which makes no sense

Doesn't need to. These are plastic toy representations of mythical creatures. The very concept of a humanoid bull wielding a massive axe makes no sense.

Keep on hating if you like. But I love these models. They're bold and characterful, and look great with the right paintjob.

snottlebocket
08-02-2010, 05:40
I'm pretty sure the only way those mino shin muscles would get that big is if they spend a lot of time lifting weight with their feet in some very weird positions.

Some muscles grow due to natural hard work and some muscles... well you'd have to do some pretty weird stuff to make them bulge.

Toads77
08-02-2010, 05:53
This is just an observation, not defending anything or whatnot. But I have seen a postman (the ones that wear shorts all the time) who walk all day, and were I live its not very flat so there's a lot of up hill. And yes the postman did have legs like the minotaur, practically every muscle visible, with the tibialis quite visible from walking up hill, which is quite like the same motion for a minotaur leaning forward to charge and get those nasty impact hits.

Devil Tree
08-02-2010, 06:11
If it was just a case of enlarged Tibialisís, I donít think that many people would mind. Itís the overall picture with the ugly heads, fooves, Austin Powersí chest hair and beefcake muscles that makes them look ridiculous.

As for my own anatomy gripeÖ
The only way for an organism to get to that level of muscle is thought an extensive regiment of body conditioning and the outright abuse of drugs like steroids. Beasts are supposed to be an army of wild and feral Beasts/Men, not bodybuilders. If youíve ever seen feral animals they look nothing like that.

81081

81082

starlight
08-02-2010, 06:17
It has nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with the look GW wanted from their sculptor...so trying to explain it with rational theories is mostly a waste of time... :(


Oh and, twenty years in healthcare before I moved on to something more interesting... :)

Seville
08-02-2010, 06:54
As for my own anatomy gripe…
The only way for an organism to get to that level of muscle is thought an extensive regiment of body conditioning and the outright abuse of drugs like steroids. Beasts are supposed to be an army of wild and feral Beasts/Men, not bodybuilders. If you’ve ever seen feral animals they look nothing like that.



It's strange, though, that you also posted a famous pic of a dog that lacks myostatin, which is a naturally produced substance that inhibits muscle growth that most living things are born with. As you can see, that dog is built.

Belgian Blue cows have all been bred to lack myostatin. I am attaching a pic of one that has never been given steroids in its life. Looks very much like the minotaur. I will also attach a pic of Markus Ruhl, a famous steroid-fueled bodybuilder.

As you can see, physiques like that are attainable even in our own world... and who needs 'roids in the world of magic?

Devil Tree
08-02-2010, 08:26
DOH! Silly me, didnít know the story behind that dog.:o

Still, you only really see this trait in things that donít have to survive in the wild. Most are genetic oddities or corn-fed animals that people keep around. If huge muscles where beneficial in nature, weíd see stuff like this more often.

With humans, itís usually the result of going to the gym 7 days a week and inhaling steroids. So while itís attainable, Iíd hardly call it common. The crazy over the top stuff also seems to be a phenomenon set in modern Western Civilization and hardly represents what is at best a chaotic tribal society.

While I canít argue about Chaos or magic, it doesnít make mental the picture of Minotaurs drinking protein shakes and lifting Herdstones all day any less silly.:eyebrows:

Condottiere
08-02-2010, 09:20
For those with a sense of humour, model your minotaurs running about with dumbbells and syringes.

Sand
08-02-2010, 11:59
Hmmm, I dunno. Realism, verisimilitude, magic, toys.

I think it's silly to expect outright "realism", but I also tend to think it's a bit silly to go "omg they're toys". I mean if all my skeleton models came with two heads they would still be toys, but they would obviously be silly representations of dead (toy) humans. So I don't think "it's just toys" gets a complete pass.

That said, I'd kinda expect Chaos creatures to be deformed and over the top, so I don't think going for actual anatomical realism is reasonable either.
And yeah, completely regardless of realism, a sculpt can be good or bad. I'd argue that the minos certainly aren't a great sculpt, which is a shame.

In the end it comes down to this: Do you think it looks badass or do you think it looks silly? I tend to come down on the "silly" side myself, but I can't get up in arms over it :)

ashc
08-02-2010, 13:44
With the minotaurs being on so many 'roids its no wonder they are so frenzied; they clearly can't participate in the mating rituals of the beastmen; that'll leave you very angry indeed! ;)

Tokamak
08-02-2010, 13:57
And I STILL bought them today. They really aren't that bad in person. My only peeve is that there's only 3 of them in one box.

theunwantedbeing
08-02-2010, 14:08
So the big problem is that bit of muscle across the front of the leg that appears to serve no purpose except for lifting things with its toes?
So on an animal where every muscle is far larger than it needs to be....that muscle should be small and weedy instead?
Hmmmm...okay.

Either way, its a plastic model. Just alter it a, takes all of about 30 seconds with a craft knife.

wizbix
08-02-2010, 14:28
A human like body with a cows head and were discussing the "realness" of the models anatomy? Haha. :p



The tibialis anterior muscle is used to inflex the foot which is a very useful function when walking, running or kicking soemthing. All three of which I suspect a minotaur would be pretty good at. If you look at pictures of this muscle it more or less follows the same pattern as the model though the model is much more accentuated but this is fantasy and we dont complain about jumbo unpickubable swords and the like, so why complain here? Or is it the case, which I suspect, that we like to complain about anytrhing new from GW?

Witchblade
08-02-2010, 15:10
Doesn't need to. These are plastic toy representations of mythical creatures. The very concept of a humanoid bull wielding a massive axe makes no sense.

http://greywolf.critter.net/images/wow/miniatures/2006-07-06-corrosive-slimes.jpg

Here, the new Ogre Gorger models. Like 'em? You obviously failed to understand the concept of verisimilitude.



As you can see, physiques like that are attainable even in our own world...
They're not. Mr.Olympia level bodybuilders and genetically engineered animals still don't reach such preposterous levels. That's because the tibialis is a muscle with very limited growth potential and a function that requires little strength. Not to mention the mino muscles that serve no function whatsoever (yet are huge).

wizbix
08-02-2010, 15:21
http://greywolf.critter.net/images/wow/miniatures/2006-07-06-corrosive-slimes.jpg

Here, the new Ogre Gorger models. Like 'em? You obviously failed to understand the concept of verisimilitude.


They're not. Mr.Olympia level bodybuilders and genetically engineered animals still don't reach such preposterous levels. That's because the tibialis is a muscle with very limited growth potential and a function that requires little strength. Not to mention the mino muscles that serve no function whatsoever (yet are huge).

But this is Warhammer and not planet Earth is it not? We dont complain that a charcter can pick up a giant sized sword or axe that in normal reality they wouldnt be able to. But thats the basis of fantasy. For me personaly there is not much difference. You either like the models or you dont and I dont think every one can be pleased all of the time as clearly demonstrated on warseer pretty much every day with all the moaning IMO.

Witchblade
08-02-2010, 15:49
But this is Warhammer and not planet Earth is it not?
You don't see the obvious correspondence between the Warhammer world and our world? Aside from the obvious references to historical cultures and existing locations, the laws of physics are nearly identical with exceptions given only for replacing laws, e.g. chaos, the warp and the winds of magic.


We dont complain that a charcter can pick up a giant sized sword or axe that in normal reality they wouldnt be able to.
That is called suspension of disbelief, often in the form of hyperbole that improves drama or aesthetics. Usually these SoDs are based on a premise, e.g. the character is a superhero.

Suspension of disbelief applies in the Dark Knight when Batman slides off a high building but survives the fall by virtue of his high tech suit. Note the premises of being a superhero and having futuristic gadgets.

Suspension of disbelief would not have applied if Batman had sprouted angelic wings from his knees. Verisimilitude is violated here, because there is no explanation available for this occurrence.

Humans process their sense of reality by means of placing their observations into a system and looking for relations. If something fits into the system, even if the entire system is fictitious (e.g. warhammer magic), verisimilitude applies. If it doesn't fit, verisimilitude does not apply. Suspension of disbelief applies when something fits into a fictitious system, but does not fit into our system of physical laws on Earth.


I dont think every one can be pleased all of the time as clearly demonstrated on warseer pretty much every day with all the moaning IMO.
That's a fallacy.

WinglessVT2
08-02-2010, 17:41
Isn't it a bad sign when you have to defend poor models by saying that 'real things can sooo look like them!' and pulling out pictures of Belgian blue cows and hardcore steroid-abusing bodybuilders?

wizbix
08-02-2010, 18:45
You don't see the obvious correspondence between the Warhammer world and our world? Aside from the obvious references to historical cultures and existing locations, the laws of physics are nearly identical with exceptions given only for replacing laws, e.g. chaos, the warp and the winds of magic.


That is called suspension of disbelief, often in the form of hyperbole that improves drama or aesthetics. Usually these SoDs are based on a premise, e.g. the character is a superhero.

Suspension of disbelief applies in the Dark Knight when Batman slides off a high building but survives the fall by virtue of his high tech suit. Note the premises of being a superhero and having futuristic gadgets.

Suspension of disbelief would not have applied if Batman had sprouted angelic wings from his knees. Verisimilitude is violated here, because there is no explanation available for this occurrence.

Humans process their sense of reality by means of placing their observations into a system and looking for relations. If something fits into the system, even if the entire system is fictitious (e.g. warhammer magic), verisimilitude applies. If it doesn't fit, verisimilitude does not apply. Suspension of disbelief applies when something fits into a fictitious system, but does not fit into our system of physical laws on Earth.


That's a fallacy.

The same can also be said of the muscle definition in the warhammer minataurs. I am sure we can suspend our beliefs to incorporate accentuated muscles in the minataurs legs just as we can with the size of the average warhammer fantasy weapon. How can we accept one and then argue against the other? That doesnt seem logical to, though you may argue that it does to you but then we will have to agree to disagree on that. It doesnt matter if there are real world correlations at the end of the day it is still a fantasy based world and more or less anything is possible including magic and beef cake minataurs with over developed muscles.

WinglessVT2
08-02-2010, 18:47
A really huge sword, shaped like a lightningbolt, that shoots fire and pure death, is cool - stupidly overmuscled minotaurs, that could easily star as henchmen in anime, isn't cool.

That's really the thing.

wizbix
08-02-2010, 18:52
A really huge sword, shaped like a lightningbolt, that shoots fire and pure death, is cool - stupidly overmuscled minotaurs, that could easily star as henchmen in anime, isn't cool.

That's really the thing.



maybe but not every one shares the same opinion and thats the crux of the matter. I still cant help feeling that people just like to moan but then thats part of the human condition I guess. ;)

WinglessVT2
08-02-2010, 18:56
People complain because they believe there is a reason.
When it comes to these figures, as well as the razorgor, the majority agrees: they're horrible.

You can pull the old 'it's chaos; it's not supposed to make sense' all you want, just like 40,000 players pull the 'they're orks; it's not supposed to make sense,' but that doesn't change the fact that these models are horrible, and look like something from early issues of Jojo's bizarre adventure.

jimbobodoll
08-02-2010, 18:58
Me.

They're 'mythological' but the concept is still flesh-and-blood creatures based on types very familar to humans - i.e. humans, and cattle - that're subject to some kind of environments and laws of physics that make most of the Warhammer world relateable to our own. Verisimilitude (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verisimilitude) - say it with me. Nothing wrong with make-believe monsters but they look a lot better when they look like real make-believe monsters. This is why your brain jumps up and down and makes woop woop alarm noises at the sight of these particular examples, although a bit of anatomical knowledge (like wot BattleofLund is looking for) helps to figure out why. Ideally only a weekend citybreak in the Realm of Chaos or a warpstone binge session should earn you a get out of jail card for wacky nonsensical anything-goes physiology, and then I could still argue there's a difference between disfiguring mutation and plain bad sculpting.

So there.


:eyebrows: Second big word for today: rationalisation.

BattleofLund: those weird diagonal bits seem to be an effort to represent the tibialis (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tibialis.png). But I can agree with Dan that it's terribly done. I'd point out more but I don't remember much other than the hoof-slippers. I haven't looked in a while and I'm not eager to look again.

This is a quality post of the kind I wish I read more often on Warseer.
Thank you Verm1s.
:)

wizbix
08-02-2010, 19:03
I happen to like them. Okay so thats not "cool" to admit on warseer but there you go. It does just come down to a matter of opinion as to whether you like the model or not despite what arguments either side puts up.

Seville
08-02-2010, 20:05
People complain because they believe there is a reason.
When it comes to these figures, as well as the razorgor, the majority agrees: they're horrible.

You can pull the old 'it's chaos; it's not supposed to make sense' all you want, just like 40,000 players pull the 'they're orks; it's not supposed to make sense,' but that doesn't change the fact that these models are horrible, and look like something from early issues of Jojo's bizarre adventure.

LOL!! :D

Absolutely pointless arguing with someone who thinks his opinion is fact. :rolleyes:

This thread has become just another warseer whinefest. I'm out.

xragg
09-02-2010, 02:48
Verisimilitude-never used it, but guessed close to the definition cause it reminds me of the word veracity. Does it share the same origin as veracity? Dictionary.com didnt exactly have them coming from the same root word, but both seemed they may stem from the latin ver. I never took latin. Does that sound correct?

Anyway, dont minos have a 2nd knee joint? Actually, its more like an ankle, but with the mobility of a knee (except bending opposite of a regular knee). Something like this: http://media.photobucket.com/image/cow%20leg%20anatomy/metalukesurfer/mentoring%20skeleton/generic-skeleton-leg.jpg
*After looking at the minos again, I see the legs are sculpted more human-like then bovine-like, so that sorta throws out my previous thought on the subject.

snottlebocket
09-02-2010, 06:03
Realism and suspension of believe aside. There's a very simple principle behind creating good sci fi or fantasy of the sort people easily accept.

You start by creating an idea that could work in real life, then you start exaggerating certain features. You add things but keep function in mind, you reshape things by gently moulding them to fit new purpose and a different reality.

When done right, for example in the recent avatar movie, it creates unbelieveable things that somehow feel so right and natural that people accept them without much effort. When this workflow is ignored and the artist simply twists, cuts and carves without thought to create something new, it feels instantly and naturally repulsive to the viewer. He might not even be able to properly explain why, but he'll immediately feel the wrongness of it.

Unfortunately GW never really mastered the right approach and constantly commits the latter. The weird slablike minotaurs are just the latest offense.

Condottiere
09-02-2010, 06:25
Artists study anatomy; I've seen fantasy art books that even explain musculature and the skeletons of made up creations. It may have been a case where the artists received instructions to ensure that the models are bulked up visually.

snottlebocket
09-02-2010, 06:35
Artists study anatomy; I've seen fantasy art books that even explain musculature and the skeletons of made up creations. It may have been a case where the artists received instructions to ensure that the models are bulked up visually.

Yeah but does it matter why they ended up looking like they do? Clearly they screwed up.

Yes the debate on whether that's true is still raging on but considering there's such heavy debate at all pretty much conclusive evidence that they failed to produce convincing models. If they did it right, there wouldn't be so many people who have a hard time accepting these models.

Olyphant
09-02-2010, 10:16
I think the legs are horrible too, I would personally get out the green stuff and give them furry legs, I'm pretty sure they don't have mach 3's in the warhammer universe

angelusmortis1384
09-02-2010, 12:02
not sure if anyones covered this... (as i cba reading through the thread lols)

but: it could simply be to do with the fact they were trying to make it easyer to cast. and i can understand now that ive read the original post for this thread, why i dont like the mino models now :S

Kholdaimon
09-02-2010, 12:20
So what do we learn, yes there are muscles in the human body there, but no they are never that developed. Does that mean anything? No, these are fantasy models, they can be this developed in these models because they are fantasy models. So can you really say they are anatomically incorrect? No. You can say that you dont like the models. Which is what people that say that the anatomy is incorrect are really saying.

And to be honest, the muscles looked huge on the first pictures released by GW where the muscles are very harshly highlighted, but on the new ones which are darker they are much less pronounced.

And as a last, without trying to brag, my shin displays a muscle mass aswell, even when in rest you can see it. I have muscular legs, maybe nothing compared to body-builders but enough to actually show the muscles. I have no problem with some fantastic creature that is clearly injected with Chaos-given steriods having even more pronounced shin-muscles... Others do, but to say it is anatomically incorrect is rather absurd since the muscles are where to should be just more pronounced which is not weird in a Fantasy setting.

Look at Armstrong and his absurd muscle-definition! (http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images_v2/002/584/823/20070226/dyn001_original_448_336_pjpeg_2584823_feeec44cce1a 7268d0710b55c7d14c73.jpg)

Christiaan

Witchblade
09-02-2010, 13:43
Did you read the thread at all?

angelusmortis1384
09-02-2010, 14:02
I Did (in the end) :D

Sygerrik
09-02-2010, 16:07
I don't see why people object to the comparison to bodybuilders and muscled up cows. Minotaurs aren't average people. They're probably among the most heavily muscled creatures of their size in the Warhammer world. They are the roid-using mega-bodybuilders of the WHFB universe.

Witchblade
09-02-2010, 17:25
I don't see why people object to the comparison to bodybuilders and muscled up cows. Minotaurs aren't average people. They're probably among the most heavily muscled creatures of their size in the Warhammer world. They are the roid-using mega-bodybuilders of the WHFB universe.
1) Muscles have limited growth potential according to their function.
2) Existing muscles can hypertrophy, but you cannot grow new muscles.

The analogy is entirely valid, but not in your favour: it shows that even the most extreme measures to grow muscle cannot produce the anatomy of GW Minotaurs.

Kholdaimon
09-02-2010, 17:57
Yes I read the thread and what I read was: "It doesnt fit in suspension of disbelief".

Which is IMO in the eye of the beholder. For me the muscles are not in the wrong place, they are highly exxagerated yes, but not in the wrong place. Thus it does suspend my disbelief. :P

For you it might not, but then I ask you, how come this doesnt suspend your disbelief however Empire noble-born rather old looking men can lift rediculously large swords?
To me that seems just as rediculous or fantastic...

Christiaan

zak
09-02-2010, 18:42
I agree that this is a 'marmite thing'. You either love them or hate them. I happen to really like the models and don't care how big a certain leg muscle is. GW have always had a policy of exaggerating certain features of a model and the mino muscle is one such example.

wizbix
09-02-2010, 21:06
Yeah but does it matter why they ended up looking like they do? Clearly they screwed up.




I wasnt going to contribute any more to this debate but that isnít a statement of fact. Its merely your expressed opinion and one I donít necessarily agree with.

wizbix
09-02-2010, 21:11
1) Muscles have limited growth potential according to their function.
2) Existing muscles can hypertrophy, but you cannot grow new muscles.

The analogy is entirely valid, but not in your favour: it shows that even the most extreme measures to grow muscle cannot produce the anatomy of GW Minotaurs.

We will just have to agree that Witchblade has far superior knowledge of muscle development in the Warhammer world! ;):p:rolleyes::) (I am jesting with you)

angelusmortis1384
09-02-2010, 21:12
For you it might not, but then I ask you, how come this doesnt suspend your disbelief however Empire noble-born rather old looking men can lift rediculously large swords?
To me that seems just as rediculous or fantastic...

Christiaan

well i have to say those swords are magical... and minotaurs are equally magical.... but! creatures of magic they may be, a certain amount of anatomical correctness is needed... when they release 'The hobbit' all the digital effects for the dragon and other creatures will have been put through generators which will instill certain anatomical correctness within the creatures to make them look 'real'. this is the same difference... and personally i prefer to see dragons with four limbs not six (wings are an evolutionary adaptation of arms), as well as see minotaurs with muscles that are correct.

wizbix
09-02-2010, 21:17
Clearly GW need to publish a version of "Grey's anatomy for the Warhammer world" in order to resolve this farcical debate.

Condottiere
09-02-2010, 21:40
They would, if they were sure people would buy enough copies.

With moving pictures, it is more important to make it believable, otherwise it becomes a major eyesore and distracts from the rest of the movie.

angelusmortis1384
09-02-2010, 21:41
Clearly GW need to publish a version of "Grey's anatomy for the Warhammer world" in order to resolve this farcical debate.

LOL is the only thing i can say to that :p

Verdande
09-02-2010, 23:16
I think they just look like ****, personally, and I'm sorry if that offends somebody. The old minotaurs, while goofy, at least looked like minotaurs. These guys are awfully sculpted, with knotty looking muscles, uniform hair, awkward horns, and poor posing. It looks more like somebody's rendition of Arnold-in-his-prime with horns. We get it, they're strong and tough. Did you really have to go overboard into the point of rediculousness?

The old minotaurs were kind of gnarly, very bestial looking, like they're rip your head off and chew on your arms. These guys look like silly humans with horns, like they'd rather tell you to "Get to the choppaah" and then flex for you.

Arjuna
10-02-2010, 05:32
The suspension of disbelief is very important if you want to have any hope of creating a science fiction or fantasy aesthetic with broad appeal. The allergic reaction by so many people is damning evidence that the new minotaurs completely fail to achieve this aesthetic standard.

In common parlance, the minotaur models suck. They dont just suck because of subjective taste, they suck harder than a black hole for obvious and objective reasons. The reaction to the minotaurs is not just because people instantly recognize that the sculpting blows nauseating chunks of nausea produced vomit ad nauseum, on account of their "wrongness" in regard to human anatomy, but also because of their incoherence with the anatomy of other vertebrates.

This is really an interesting phenomenon (expression of intuitive, observation based rejection of the minotaur model's "fantasy anatomy" by lay people) to me because I have taught comparative anatomy at the university level, and the rejection of the minotaur models is a manifestation of sound anatomical knowledge by many people that probably have not studied anatomy in any formal manner.

In a perverse way the minotaurs are a failure because of the overall success and high quality of miniatures produced by Games Workshop and not a few other modern miniature companies. GW has an incredibly coherent aesthetic for its model ranges and obviously they cannot just pass off models that look like they have been sculpted by someone with less three dimensional modeling talent than my own lowly level of sculpting incompetence just because "its chaos or its fantasy"

Some of the most disappointing posts in this repeated topic are arguments that the mino's are ok, "because they are chaos or fantasy" and anything can be accommodated, no matter how wretchedly sculpted in this overall scheme of things. These appeals to the illogical are nothing more than some some of the worst fan boy Games Workshop excuse making behavior you will see on Warseer.

The fact that "just because its fantasy" does not cut the proverbial mustard, or even the mayonaise, near melted butter, white bread, horrid English made porridge or even nitrogen gas under an atmospheric pessure of 0.000000000000000000005 millibars is clearly manifest by the panning of the razgor models by all sane people who are not blind or have a multi-generational family history of ancestors with high levels of fluctuating asymmetry.

wizbix
10-02-2010, 11:34
As it stands it is still all about personal taste. Some like them some don’t. It doesn’t really matter what our credentials are, if you are university lecturer or if I have attended degree level courses at university 3 times and finally settled on a career as a nurse (who knows a little about anatomy) as it’s irrelevant. I like the models and I feel it pretty easy to suspend my disbelief in the face of those minotaur legs as I can do with equal ease with walking tree men, acid vomiting trolls, Flaming daemons of Tsentch and all manner of undead or creatures that probably couldn’t fly under normal realistic physical conditions. To simply call those of us that do like it as ‘fan boys’ is a little belittling and elitist sounding - not a path the debate need go down if it is to remain good natured, wouldn’t you agree?

kaubin
10-02-2010, 11:43
Doesn`t the fluff on Minotaurs state that they are mutant monsters mutated by the warp of chaos? If so, doesn`t it make sense that they grew things that didn`t make sense in the fast growth-mutation process, like Rat Ogres insane-imposible-to-hold upper body with those teeny weeny legs, or even a hell pit abomination? Personally I think the model is great, and you can even rationalize that huge muscle with the impact hits. It`s hugeness makes them dash forward so fast that combined with their size they dash through like a car!

Kholdaimon
10-02-2010, 12:23
The suspension of disbelief is very important if you want to have any hope of creating a science fiction or fantasy aesthetic with broad appeal. The allergic reaction by so many people is damning evidence that the new minotaurs completely fail to achieve this aesthetic standard.

In common parlance, the minotaur models suck. They dont just suck because of subjective taste, they suck harder than a black hole for obvious and objective reasons. The reaction to the minotaurs is not just because people instantly recognize that the sculpting blows nauseating chunks of nausea produced vomit ad nauseum, on account of their "wrongness" in regard to human anatomy, but also because of their incoherence with the anatomy of other vertebrates.

1: While the muscles are over-exxagerated, they are not in the wrong place, atleast not in the legs which is what people are mostly discussing about.
2: In common parlance, fancy smancy words for "in general opinion", is a fallacy: do you know the opinion of most of GW's players? No. You know the opinion of the vocal part of the online (Warseer) community. And I assume you know what happens when several people in a row react negatively to models/rules? People that feel differently either dont voice their opinion because they dont want to get dragged into an argument about a highly subjective matter on the internet vs multiple opponents or they do voice their opinion and get swarmed by those vocal negative people. Thus the general atmosphere becomes more negative and inflated then it actually is.
And even if you did know the opinion of every Warseer member with an opinion does that tell you everything? Again no. The majority of the players I know never go to a forum or warhammer website other then maybe the Games Workshop site or the site of their local gaming club. These people will not be influenced by the negativity that has allready permeated the larger forums.

People in general want to conform, they have an internal need to be part of a larger community and to do this they will conform to this communities beliefs and opinions.

A good example is the poll on the Herdstone about whether people like the new book. If you would observe the general voiced feelings about the book on the numerous threads on the forum, then you would probably think most people dont like the book. However in a vote it actually appears the majority of the people do like the book (55 to 67% positive, 12 to 18% negative, rest undecided).


Some of the most disappointing posts in this repeated topic are arguments that the mino's are ok, "because they are chaos or fantasy" and anything can be accommodated, no matter how wretchedly sculpted in this overall scheme of things. These appeals to the illogical are nothing more than some some of the worst fan boy Games Workshop excuse making behavior you will see on Warseer.

The fact that "just because its fantasy" does not cut the proverbial mustard, or even the mayonaise, near melted butter, white bread, horrid English made porridge or even nitrogen gas under an atmospheric pessure of 0.000000000000000000005 millibars is clearly manifest by the panning of the razgor models by all sane people who are not blind or have a multi-generational family history of ancestors with high levels of fluctuating asymmetry.

Hmm, I havent seen many people say "that it is ok because it is Chaos or Fantasy". I agree this is a bad explanation.
A good explanation would be: "For me the model looks allright, the muscles are highly exxagerated but because this is Chaos or Fantasy it doesnt look bad to me". Basicly what these people are saying is that their disbelief is suspended because for them Chaos and/or Fantasy allow more suspension. You can't fault that arguement, you can ofcourse disagree since it is entirely subjective. You can even explain WHY you dont agree, but you cant assume people will start to agree after your explanation...

The Razorgor to me does not look good, it is weird, the model (and especially the conversions) looks a bit like a joke but the joke doesnt work and doesnt fit in the background for the model, army or setting to me.
However calling people (and their family ancestors) names because their subjective opinion does not agree with yours is rather uncivilized, dont you think? And from someone who claims to be a highly educated university teacher that seems rather unfitting. I assume you understand that you may actually have to apologize for making such a crude statement?

Since you cant actually solidify the claim that GW failed with their Minotaur design because the majority of Beastmen-players dislike the new sculpts and since the (admittingly amuzingly voiced :)) 'facts' you give are actually no more then opinions, you cant actually win this argument.
Once you provide this forum with the opinion of a large (say 50-100) group of Beastmen players that are not influenced by online opinion-forming and this group shows the majority disliking the new models, then you can claim that GW failed with their design(s). And then I will probably admit that GW made a judgement error in their design because they alienated the majority of their customer-base for this particular product. However I will still like the models, that you can never change. ;)

And no, I am not a GW fanboy, I hate their pricing system, I hate their lack of attention to detail when writing rules and I hate the fact that they cant balance armybooks either internally or between books.

Christiaan

Sand
10-02-2010, 12:46
I tend to flip-flop a bit about the minotaurs, honestly. Sometimes I hate them, then when I go back and look I find them much more tolerable.
I think they look bad, but salvageable -which is not a ringing endorsement of course.

Partly my dislike is about what "creative vision" (if I may be so bold) I would've wished for in a WFB Minotaur (and some of the other Beastman minis to) and in part it is simply because I find them to be a sub-par sculpt for GW minis. I find some of their muscles to simply look silly, whether they're anatomically correct or not. Parts of their bodies (mainly the legs) just look like melted candle-wax to me. Which is bad.

I have no problem extending my suspension of disbelief somewhat, because yeah, they're supposed to be hideous, crazy, blood-mad, rabid mutated bull-monsters. So I do think they get a pass for being somewhat over the top anatomically. I even like the idea that parts of their anatomy might be somewhat pointless and in complete defiance of nature. The Chaos Spawn certainly have many features that don't really serve any functions.
That doesn't mean that anything and everything is a-ok though. They still need to look somewhat convincing, at the end of the day.
Sadly, they don't.

theunwantedbeing
10-02-2010, 12:52
Having actually seen the models up close, there's nothing wrong with those shin muscles.
It's just the GW official image where they were painted stupidly that makes them look so terrible.