Is it just me, or…..

[RWJP]

just for once id like to see an unboxing where the guys looks at the minis and goes "well theyre abit arent they." just so i know they are being honest. 

Why does that make you believe they're being honest?

 

In fact, I would go so far as to argue that if a reviewer said "Well these new miniatures are a bit  " they are being less than honest... From my perspective, I would even suggest GW haven't made an objectively bad miniature in a very long time. Long gone are the days of hilariously dodgy sculpts (Sister Dialogus), models that don't fit together (basically anything metal) Sure, there have been some that aren't as good as others, and there have been plenty that I don't like or care about, but none of them are objectively bad. 

 

A reviewer/content creator/influencer would have to go into WAY more detail than "These minis are bad" to make me believe they were being honest. 

[MegaVolt87]

I value nuanced critique such as "this design feature X on this model doesn't make sense because its a departure from its artwork and lore description. If it were changed as Y, the model would be vastly improved. I don't like the model as a result and would recommend its actually fixable with some conversion/ sculpting work." etc. Wow its  , no further explanation is extremely lazy, as lazy as the shills gushing over how wonderful it all is. 

[Evil Eye]

I'd absolutely agree with the sentiment that negative =/= honest. For every "Wow! [X] is amazing and perfect and if you don't like it you're a horrible person!" shill for a product, there's a "Boo! [X] product is rubbish and dangerous, the creators are evil baby-eaters and if you don't like it you're a no-good bigot!" shill for someone else's product. Or occasionally they might even be paid opposition to make people that don't like the product look bad- I doubt this is the case with GW as there are plenty of people willing to make their critics look bad by association without needing financial compensation, but the point is that just because someone is critical of a product doesn't mean they're being honest/aren't in someone's pocket.

 

Whilst I generally dislike "influencer" (spits) culture, our hobby is far more tolerable than most with its officially-sanctioned content creators. Most are just people who want to talk about toy soldiers, and enjoy having a source of toy soldiers to talk about. Pete the Wargamer is IIRC a partnered channel with GW but he never seems like a shill, he just posts cool conversions and painting guides. Which amusingly enough does have the side effect of making me want to buy and build more miniatures (not always GW, he introduced me to the Wargames Atlantic spider box!) but let's be real, someone engaging in a hobby making you want to also engage in that hobby is far from the most insidious form of marketing there ever was. Effective marketing is not always underhanded after all.

 

GW having hobbyists doing promotional work is not an inherently bad thing; community engagement is (usually) helpful. Said hobbyists don't seem to be particularly hamstrung to keep to a script or only say certain things either; obviously if they came out and said "Yeah Dominion is a crock of groxdung, don't buy it" they're going to get dropped pretty quickly, but unless Dominion really was a crock of groxdung that would be pretty reasonable on GW's part.

 

That's not to say I think GW can do no wrong or that they shouldn't be carefully scrutinized. If they were dropping partners for, say, having a Vallejo paint bottle visible in the background of a shot, suggesting (legitimate) ways to make parts go further, or worse dropping them for things completely unrelated to the hobby (for instance pulling a Blizzard, who booted a pro player from one of their competitions for voicing support for Hong Kong) then yeah that would be hugely worrying.

 

[Mildly sensitive topic within]

Likewise, whilst I'm sure this will attract a lot of jeers (raises void shields) I actually think the Arch situation was not exactly very well managed and I do not care for the idea of them trying to use """legal""" strongarming to un-person/"cancel"/silence critics or people involved in the hobby but not actually officially partnered with or endorsed by them for the crime of having unpopular opinions, be they related to the hobby or not. Before anyone comes after me with an inferno pistol, I hasten to add I have never watched an Arch video in my life and am not especially interested in his output, but I find his Exterminatus sets a dangerous precedent for big companies being able to silence people they don't like. Sure, one day it might be a rather loudmouthed and politically incorrect individual who happens to make content (unofficially) relating to Warhammer, but where do you draw the line? The guy who makes entirely safe and inoffensive videos on wargaming but mentions on social media that he thinks, for instance, the US 2020 elections were compromised? The girl who blogs herself building an oldschool Realm of Chaos inspired army featuring themes that are too extreme for "modern" GW and makes some people uncomfortable? The guy who does painting tutorials and suggests people avoid Corax White because it is, objectively, a bit of a crap paint? Distasteful as people may find him I feel the Arch situation was a bit of a "canary moment" for GW and their community engagement. Sure, they may be small and squeaky and loud and annoying, but if they go silent and die then it's a sign to get the hell out of there, because there's poison in the air.

 

Or, to translate that from clumsy allegory, we must be very careful not to allow GW too much power over who can and can't talk about the hobby online, partner or not, and regardless of how you feel about him, Arch being Squatted was an overreach of GW's power. I could wax lyrical about how the "Warhammer Is For Everyone" spiel was an unnecessary virtue signal and a thinly-veiled message of "We are a brand that conforms to establishment talking points and if you disagree with that we will make you unwelcome" but I need not to raise my blood pressure and I don't fancy causing the mother of all flamewars.

 

What? Oh, yes, GW and their partnered hobbyists. Overall I think it's a good idea and a great way to keep in touch with the community, I just hope they don't get too big for their boots and use their considerable influence to try and squash any dissenting voices. Partnered hobbyists are good and all, but independent ones are also important. There's room for both.

[Rik Lightstar]

Promotional Content from "influencers" is the modern day equivalent of the newspaper obituaries of old. There's a specific language to them that can convey "criticism without being directly negative".

 

- "I think this could look great with a head swap too" rather than "dayum what happened to the sculpt for this face?"

 

- "Fred was vivacious and fond of female company" rather than "Fred was a drunk and a womaniser"

 

Once you start reading (or listening) between the lines it's clearer. Tyler Mengel who is constantly doing content for the community website and White Dwarf did a review of the new synthetic brush range which is a great example of this.

 

Rik

[Redcomet]

Does GW actively utilize its known content creators on social media to push their new releases?

 

I’ve seen it time and again, a new release is hyped and drops, and the ten to twenty usual suspects put out posts saying how great the release is, look at my release day haul, just painted up the new hotness, etc etc etc.

 

Is this just a new product being consumed and talked about or is there something more directed to this. It can’t be an accident or coincidence that every time I log onto a social account on a release day, I see a few posts of how great everyone’s life is and I think to myself ‘gee, I kinda want this box of X’. These people I’m following buy literally every release.

 

I’m not raging against it or anything, I just want to know I’m not the only one getting severe FOMO with these releases and am seeing it primarily through social media activities. It does seem very targeted.

It has more to do with being a content creator. You pretty much have to put out relevant content all the time or your fan base will get bored and leave. Hence why a good portion of the content creators ends up burning out with stress at some point.

[MegaVolt87]

Most of these influencer "burnout" is due to them attempting to make a living doing it. By the four, I miss the old internet where people were not trying to make a paycheck from their recreational activities/ down time etc.

[AenarIT]

The best content creators are the ones that do not even try to monetize their content. They often just publish it for the pleasure of doing so. 
This also means that they don't do it regularly. 
There's plenty of gems on the internet (tutorials, guides, reviews, ...), it's just hard to find them.

[Sete]

Does GW actively utilize its known content creators on social media to push their new releases?

 

I’ve seen it time and again, a new release is hyped and drops, and the ten to twenty usual suspects put out posts saying how great the release is, look at my release day haul, just painted up the new hotness, etc etc etc.

 

Is this just a new product being consumed and talked about or is there something more directed to this. It can’t be an accident or coincidence that every time I log onto a social account on a release day, I see a few posts of how great everyone’s life is and I think to myself ‘gee, I kinda want this box of X’. These people I’m following buy literally every release.

 

I’m not raging against it or anything, I just want to know I’m not the only one getting severe FOMO with these releases and am seeing it primarily through social media activities. It does seem very targeted.

Ye if I was receiving free stuff, I would sing it praises all day ;)

[Azekai]

Promotional Content from "influencers" is the modern day equivalent of the newspaper obituaries of old. There's a specific language to them that can convey "criticism without being directly negative".

 

- "I think this could look great with a head swap too" rather than "dayum what happened to the sculpt for this face?"

 

- "Fred was vivacious and fond of female company" rather than "Fred was a drunk and a womaniser"

 

Once you start reading (or listening) between the lines it's clearer. Tyler Mengel who is constantly doing content for the community website and White Dwarf did a review of the new synthetic brush range which is a great example of this.

 

Rik

Sounds like doublespeak; dancing around the truth does the truth no favors. I would much prefer people spoke plainly and did not mince their words.

 

I also agree that it is unhelpful to make statements like 'GW sucks lol' or 'GW tha bestest evar' but the above isn't nuance, it is self-protection masquerading as nuance.

[jeremy1391]

In the era of social media and YouTube “influencers” and content creators will get access to stuff earlier than us normies. It is definitely an effective marketing tool. Hell that’s how they got me to buy the Indomitus box for my Imperial fists event though nothing in the set is extremely imperial fisty

[BrandX]

The example provided by rik states that the model could be great. This means it isn’t. If it had a new head. It’s not difficult at all to understand that the Hs holt of the head is bad in this case. From what I’ve seen reviewers will flat out say that they don’t like the head. But that they can swap it easily enough.

[OldWherewolf]

A reviewer/content creator/influencer would have to go into WAY more detail than "These minis are bad" to make me believe they were being honest.

Exactly. I look for what is constructive in criticism and praising.  Otherwise (IMHO) it's just empty words, especially from naysayers.  These mean exactly the same thing to me:

• X is soooo cool.
• X is soooo bad.

Both of which mean exactly nothing.  There are 4 generic criticisms:

• Too much
• Too little
• Too fast
• Too slow

Those can be applied to anything at any time, and they all mean exactly nothing.  Think of the last miniature you painted, and I throw this at you:

 

It took you forever to paint that thing, and then you finally rushed it skipping the important stuff and doing too much on the fiddly bits.

In one sentence I did all 4 criticisms, not knowing who you are, where you live, what army your play and without ever even having seen the fig. 

 

So I look for details & specifics.  "the top knot on X looks terrible" (mean nothing) to "the top knot looks like it's made for a character going to the left while the body is going to the right" tells me something.  or "the mold like cuts right thru this key detail which unless cleaned correctly will make the fig look weird".

 

Fanboys and naysayers get the same thing from me:  the mute button.

[BrandX]

Your adding the details of WHY it is bad. Or good. “The angle of the top knot shows the motion of the attack. It fits well with the models foot placement and swinging arm”.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Have seen a couple of youtubers saying they want the boxes sooner so they can have them painted etc for when embargos lift and offer more than bland unboxing vids

 

Yeah I watched a video like that today while I was working on some AoS minis. It was more centered on the fact that he couldn't do a review, because he didn't really have time build, paint, and play the game before the embargo was lifted. I think most content creators would probably be harsher in reviews if they had more time with the product. Dark Eldar are perfect example of book that was highly praised during reviews and then two weeks later was a troubling OP release. 

 

I think the most troubling part of this topic isn't the targeted social media its how fast we have to make a decision to get some of this stuff. I was able to take my time an buy a limited run GW product for the first time in a while. It will be interesting to see if this was caused by the new queue system, huge supply, or lack of demand. Hopefully the queue system slowed down the bots enough that the resellers couldn't manufacture the artificial scarcity they need to make money.

[Firedrake Cordova]

Hopefully the queue system slowed down the bots enough that the resellers couldn't manufacture the artificial scarcity they need to make money.

To be honest, I'm hoping it did more than just slow them down, as I have no time for profiteers (for that is what scalpers are). If you look at the QueueIT software's product page, it does actually have some anti-bot features (e.g. CAPTCHA's, IP-banning), so hopefully they're working. :)

[Dark Shepherd]

 

 

Have seen a couple of youtubers saying they want the boxes sooner so they can have them painted etc for when embargos lift and offer more than bland unboxing vids

Yeah I watched a video like that today while I was working on some AoS minis. It was more centered on the fact that he couldn't do a review, because he didn't really have time build, paint, and play the game before the embargo was lifted. I think most content creators would probably be harsher in reviews if they had more time with the product. Dark Eldar are perfect example of book that was highly praised during reviews and then two weeks later was a troubling OP release.

 

I think the most troubling part of this topic isn't the targeted social media its how fast we have to make a decision to get some of this stuff. I was able to take my time an buy a limited run GW product for the first time in a while. It will be interesting to see if this was caused by the new queue system, huge supply, or lack of demand. Hopefully the queue system slowed down the bots enough that the resellers couldn't manufacture the artificial scarcity they need to make money.

Thats a good point, though flipside is OP codex like Knights 8th ed would sell even more perhaps.

 

Though boxes/new games less of a risk for bad reviews than all codex/supplement

[Blurf]

i despise it, the fake enthusiasm, the open mouth face pressed against he box selfie, the constant "this is the best ever" just for once id like to see an unboxing where the guys looks at the minis and goes "well theyre abit arent they." just so i know they are being honest. But i know how the system works, you dont get the goodies unless you play ball and give glowing reviews. i think its the reason so many people give the outer circle so much flak because hes pretty much the only somewhat honest voice in a sea of sycophants.

This is actually a really childish way of looking at it.

1. The biggest content creators will almost always get 'freebies' regardless of their outlook on the product. Gamers Nexus gets free Nvidia and Intel stuff despite coining the term 'waste of sand' for their product stack.

2. Even if they don't, a big enough content creator will just go BUY the product to create content with it. Mini-wargaming products are frankly paltry expenses compared to things like tech Youtube and represent a damn near negligible expense per video for large enough creators.

3. Negative or 'Meh' opinions do exist, I have seen plenty of them, ESPECIALLY of book reviews.

4. Negative opinions are NOT inherently more honest than positive ones.

 

One point I really want to re-emphasize is that getting free stuff is not that big of a deal for most of the biggest content creators. Miniwargaming and Tabletop Titans have massive collections of models already and honestly don't get much out of their review content. GMG might need his review videos to keep afloat but he's a naturally optimistic guy who doesn't play competitively so his reviews would skew positive regardless.

 

Anyone with any kind of integrity (or just business savvy) understands that your content as a large creator, positive OR negative, is more valuable to the company than whatever paltry thing they send over.

[MegaVolt87]

 

Anyone with any kind of integrity (or just business savvy) understands that your content as a large creator, positive OR negative, is more valuable to the company than whatever paltry thing they send over.

 

 

This point in particular is spot on. Companies are starting to wake up and be far less likely to blacklist influencers who give negative press on their products. Why? because they will spend their influencer money and review it poorly anyway in addition to clapping back on socials at how company X is hopeless/scared/ pathetic for not giving a review copy. Its just needless drama thats avoided by giving it out for free to such individuals, which is worth more than a free product. 

Edited July 19, 2021 by MegaVolt87