I have ranted about plastic modelkits vs toy soldiers before.
The latest issue of Miniature Wargames, came with a free sprue of a mounted knight, for the game Conquest - The Last Argument of Kings (never heard of this game before, but I also think I'm not the target audience anymore :-)) The figures of this game are also much larger as what we would expect even from "heroic 28mm" (which really is 32mm?). The figures looks closer to 42mm, although I didn't make a formal measurement. But you can probably find the relevant information online.
The sprue didn't look very inviting. Sprues these days are very obviously "computer generated", a result of some optimization algorithm to lay out all 3D components. To me, it simply looks like a piece of soulless plastic. How can a good toy soldier ever come out of this?
Yesterday - after working in the garden - I suddenly felt the urge to put this thing together. So I set myself to it, and 15 minutes later (take or give a few minutes), the knight was assembled.
Now, I admire the design of such a figure. The level of detail and complexity is something that was unachievable when I starter miniature wargaming in the 80s. And if you paint it up, it would probably look fantastic.
But to me, it has no character. No matter how detailed, it feels like a modelkit, not a toy soldier. It's still soulless plastic to me.
I could not agree more!
ReplyDeleteI couldn't disagree more. Maybe because I spend a lot of time converting plastic miniatures, making it a more creative pursuit than when you simply follow the assembly instructions.
ReplyDeleteIt is of course not a rational, but rather an emotional thing. It might also depend on how you prefer to play wargames (small skirmish games vs large-scale battles etc.).
DeleteBut for me, the plastic miniatures of today look too "clean", too "sterile". I agree they are marvelous pieces of design, but they leave me cold.
Isn't that just nostalgia?
DeleteI have just the opposite feeling. When I look at old stuff (I got my first miniatures in the 80s), I mostly see wonky sculpts that consistently failed to live up to the artwork or historical reality. I don't have this with, for example, comic book art or SF/fantasy/historical illustration, where there's a lot of old stuff I still rate very highly, even higher than much of what is churned out today. But in miniatures, no, not at all.
I see plastic figures that look like they are having some kind of fit. Impossible poses are another. I quite like old school figures, it’s just personal preference I guess. I wonder how gamers will feel when the plastic goes brittle over time?
DeleteMy reaction was, "Worth £12" - Who do you think you're kidding? For that kind of money I could buy over sixty 10mm Pendraken infantrymen to swell the ranks of my armies! Or, thinking plastic kits, two 1/72 Airfix Hurricanes from my local Lidl.
ReplyDeleteIt's a plastic kit, albeit a very detailed one, not a toy soldier IMHO.
10mm, now you are talking! Better than paying an arm or a leg, or both, for some GW plastic rubbish.
DeleteIndeed, the price tag of 12 quid is a little bit weird. Rather expensive. But I guess that ties in to the trend of playing games with fewer figures ... each figure needs to become more expensive.
DeleteIt would be a true monster in metal, a squadron more-so. Plastic has its place (I like it) and considering we are such a small niche hobby, we are lucky that we have so much choice.
ReplyDeleteSometimes these discussions and strongly held positions remind me of the time when digital cameras were becoming the thing and the old guard film people, felt and expressed repeatedly, that digital was of the devil and would never catch on and yet here we are!
Absolutely. And I am definitely not saying my slight dislike for plastic is not based on nostalgia ;-)
DeleteNevertheless, metals are my frame of reference, and I simply like them better. Perhaps I'm getting old ;-)
I think plastic has its uses. Kitbashing can be very creative, and some of the new kits are excellent for building up forces. Companies such as Perry Miniatures produce sculpts very close to the feel of their metal work but (arguably) with more versatility and very cost-effective for building up forces. There are projects I couldn't do without plastic, although the fiddliness of sticking together kits is very taxing for me.
ReplyDeleteBut I really was put off by this mini on MW. I guess I'm not the target market, but I couldn't understand its bizarre scale, which made both the model itself and the parts useless for my purposes. And it was full of extraneous detail and had nothing of the human touch. Just not for me. So I do agree that this model left me cold. I just don't think its fair to see it as an exemplar of far better instances of plastic kits out there.
That said, of course I prefer metal. Just so much more satisfying to work with, for me.
Kitbashing is always a good idea ;-)
DeleteI was planning to use this miniature as a statue in my fantasy games. Paint it up as a bronze statue ...
I dont like this particular model that much, because its in yet another different scale - we already have far too many in my opinion. I dont have an issue with Perry or Warlord plastic 28mm historicals, however, except they are slightly harder to paint because the detail is more realistically subtle than all the hard edges on some of the metal brands. I really do not get the nostalgia for one pose fits all shiny gloss poorly detailed figures from the 60's and 70's though - even though I started out with Minifigs Napoleonics as a teenager, I only ever used matt paint, albeit Humbrol enamel!
ReplyDeleteI don't object to plastic figures because of the plastic ... but rather the modelkit nature of many of these plastic figures. I have quite some plastic figures myself, but I still think a proper figure should be in one piece as much as possible. That's what I mean by figures having a "soul".
DeleteBut would you be able to tell if you saw a painted miniature you didn't know and were not told who produced it?
Delete