Hello, it is me again!
I was sent an article by my brother the other day and it was an interview with a 40k/AoS gamer done by our equivalent of the BBC. Now, I am always a bit hesitant when reading interviews with wargamers, because in my experience the journalist invariably seems to go to the interview with the mindset of
"Wow, I'm sure this is going to be a group of WEIRD and STRANGE people doing WEIRD and STRANGE things. I am sure everything will be too WEIRD and STRANGE for a normal person like me to understand!" We had a reporter show up at a tournament I ran back in college and the interview was very much that.
"Did you know that each little miniature has a whole rulebook to itself! How WEIRD and STRANGE!"
(The first sentence is almost literally from the interview...)
I mean, DID you see a huge pile of books next to the gaming table? No, you did not.
Anyways, this interview was mostly quite good! How nice! The guy interviewed talked about how he paints to relax and unwind, that wargaming is a social hobby, etc, etc. He did not come off as an unwashed crazy.
What was the headline on the front page of the website:
"Eric spends 200 hours painting one tiny miniature!"
Did the person writing the headline not read the article. It literally quotes him saying he spends 2-5 hours per model. It does indeed quote him saying he enjoys playing with something he's spent 200 hours painting, but that's his whole army, not one tiny guy. Even if you are trying to win the Golden Daemon you're not spending 200 hours painting just one little guy without a massive diorama base.
Did it not occur to the person in charge that 200 hours doesn't make any sense for one tiny guy? That is TWENTY-FIVE working days!
My bet is that they were too busy thinking "Oh, what a group of WEIRD and STRANGE people! Imagine spending 200 hours on just one tiny miniature! How WEIRD and STRANGE!"