Simple question (with 50,000 complex answers) just how useful do you find the Reviews and News here, other sites and in the print magazines? Do you buy products on the basis of Reviews?

Personally, I use only one other site for reviews - P.M.M.S.. For News I find the Vendors Forums on both Missing-Lynx and P.M.M.S. VERY impressive indeed...

I normally hit sites dedicated to 1/72 scale armor for information regarding those products. I also pop into manufacturer sites like Dragon and Revell Germany for timely information on new 1/72 scale products.

Edit: I should add that I may take a gander at a review when highlighted on the homepage or what's new, but only if the subject interests me or the summary catches my eye.

I use this site along with it's sister sites Aeroscale+modelshipwrights.Also Cybermodeler,and Hyperscale have been helpful.Steelnavy is good.Also asking on these sites if anyone has had experience with a particlular model works.I always read Finescalemodeler reviews and also use their archives for past kits.

Overall I find reviews and advice helpful,though reviewing a model can be like reviewing a movie,some love it and some hate it.It depends on modeling skills and taste.I have went out and purchased models based on good reviews and have not been happy,but that could be due to my tastes and skills,and I have taken chances on kits that did not have good reviews and have enjoyed them.So reviews are just another source for info ,not the final say on what I buy.

very useful.

the news gives a flavour of new products, the reviews i often use to determine if a kit is worth buying or not.

About other sites: quite frankly, i don't visit other sites, i got attached to this one and would like to see it grow and proser even more.

I have introduced a few suggestions that would, in my opinion, have an important added value to the site allowing more intelligetn browsing through the content.

Merlin moved these things to the staff forums

I look at the reviews that interest me on these (Kitmaker) sites and then Terry Ashly's P.M.M.S. site.
I have generally made up my mind about buying an item prior to reading the review, however if the review is less than I expected I can easily be convinced not to buy the kit.

Cheers,
Charles

Useful ofcourse.

Since this is one of my fav site (and mostly visited one), the news here are very much appreciated. The reviews themselves are well done. Ofcourse PMMS is the game when it comes to reviews, but I always check multiple reviews before grabbing the kit.

I do subscribe to a couple of the modelling monthly magazines and do enjoy reading the reviews, however I tend also to look at the reviews on a number of sites such as Armorama, PMMS and Track Link and do tend to take more account of the latter. My reason being the article in a magazine is based upon the perception of one individual, whereas on the internet as well as the initial work done by the writer, you also find that other parties will add their personal perception and actual experience of the product.

This I feel tends to give a more balanced view as to the kit, tool, aftermarket or any other of the many products that are available.

From the information I am able to form an opinion as to whether or not the article is something that I wish to buy, or indeed give it a miss.

So I do and find great value in using the many resources that are now available via the web.

John

I read the news on Armorama and PMMS with great interest when ever something interesting (modern) pops up. I find the online rewievs much more up to date than the ones found in the different mags I subscribe to.

Erik

I read the reviews here first. The news articles help keep me up to date on what is coming. If I am considering buying a product, I read anything I can find on line or in magazines. Build articles are most likely to sway me one way or the other than in box reviews. I consider myself a casual, average modeler, so I am interested in things like fit and value and fun builds. While i enjoy review builds by Vinnie and others, they are more advanced than I, so I also like to follow builds by other members who may run into the same problem I would.
In short, news and reviews make up about 50% of my decision, with the other 50% coming from fellow modelers and holding the box in my hand (read impulse buy).

The news and reviews section is very useful. Very little falls though the cracks. The only other site I hit for news is the PMMS. The only thing I could suggest to make it better is to encourage people to post more reviews on older kits. For newbies having a more comprehensive section would be helpful. Even if it is just a "look inside the box" review, not necessarily a indepth bolt by bolt breakdown. I think alot of people are intimidated and won't try to post a review unless they are an uber expert. Sometimes with older kits you just want to know if it has rubber band tracks vs indi links or other basic info.

Ryan, an interesting point, However, the problem is with reviews, you have to balance it out - some who read will be 'experts' others 'newbies'. The nature of the product also dictates the treatment you give it some are designed with the super-detailer in mind, others with Mr Average. I got an interesting insight the other day when I reviewed Steve Zaloga's new book on Modelling the M4 - Steve (bit of name-dropping ) said that one of the decisions to NOT put a 'Novice' project in the book was because few of the M4s on the market DON'T require a fair bit of work to bring them up to scratch therefore the book should be 'labelled' for moderately experienced modellers... In my opinion, books like this should go to LESS experienced modellers simply to grasp useful techniques. That, ultimately, is what we all want to acheive in the reviews - by going into a lot of detail so the user can decide if its the 'right' product for them. Vinnie's 'TauchPanzer' review was a clear case in point - a product aimed at the more experienced modeller whereas the re-worked T34/85 would be an excellent kit for a (relative) newcomer... Thanks, you've given me some food for thought here, Jim

Oh I don't think there is anything wrong with the reviews the way they are, if you are knowledgeable, go ahead and give us all the info. We are getting great reviews on the new kits by guys who know what they are talking about. I was just meaning that alot of older kits, you can't find a review for them. Maybe people say why bother, its 20 years old? But a simple "what's in the box" review (which most of us could do, HAHA!) would be handy for alot of newbies who are looking at buying some of the old revell/airfix/Italeri/Tamyia kits. You see threads about some old kit and some of the old hands who have built the kit can recite from memory what's in the box and how it was to build. Personally I like to read some sort of review on every kit I buy, and I definately buy things based on reviews I read here.

News and reviews extremely useful. I would buy a kit (or not) on the strength of the review.
I also use PMMS but here is my main site,
Cheers
Tony

I read the news and reviews on this site with keen interest. I look at PMMS, but I think the "in-depth" news stories and reviews are better here...just my opinion. I have (without doubt, and waaaay too often if you believe my wife) placed orders based on the reviews, and orders or pre-orders from the pics accompanying news stories here. This is definately one of the most important roles this site plays, for me.


Mike

I read all of the reviews here first. The reviews are always in depth and extremely well done. I will read reviews at other sites but only after I have read them here first. I have bought and built kits based only on the review that I read here.

I don't base much of my buying on reviews. Nothing to do with the production standard of any review - so don't be offended Jim.

My main criteria for buying a kit are the subject matter, whether I feel I'm getting a bargain, my previous experience of the manufacturer's other kits, what I see multiple posters write in forums and finally, extended build articles.

I was delighted to see your recent piece about 1/35 figures set in the Warsaw uprising because the subject matter was unusual, even though I haven't seen that manufacturer's kits reviewed or discussed before and I have no personal experience of them.


Sean

They are usefull and interesting, keep them coming!

I read all reviews, here and elsewhere to keep up on what's coming out that interests me as well as to learn and know what I should buy and what I should avoid. The super detailed reviews are excellent but I'm not one to be too concerned with ultra realism, my main concerns are: what are the glaring (if any) flaws in the kit for building purposes and how well does it fit? Those may be more of a build feature but I'm more concerned with how much time and effort will need to go into a kit at this point in my neophyte modelling life than I am uber accuracy.

Some people will label a kit a 'bad' kit in a review (not talking about here) just because something's off a couple of MM. While that may drive the accuracy hounds crazy, it doesn't necessarily make a kit bad. The most important feature in a review that I think should be added is the "fun factor", yea a kit might not be 100% accurate but the important thing is, was it fun to build? Fun is why we build models isn't it?

Excellent point.

Speaking in general ...

My buy/build criteria is the subject (& scale).

My sole interest in reviews is the simple announcement that a particular subject/scale combo is available. If I have no interest, I'll not even look. Because I haunt a half-dozen sites, get a half-dozen 'zines, and email notices, I have a pretty good flow of this info coming in and don't rely on any particular one ...

Once I decide to purchase a subject of interest, or better yet, actually move it to the workbench, then I'll search out reviews to see what others have said/done -- forewarned is forearmed & all that ...

I have no use for In-Box reviews, be it kits, details, or decals ...

Specifically here, I look, but my perception is that there are too few build-reviews ...

John