Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
primalxconvoy wrote:
I have to disagree. Although G1 can get a pass for not being authentic to the cartoons, I have no empathy for the original Beast wars toys, as it was the SHOW thta was the "real" look, rather than the toys )toy-only molds nonwithstanding). Thus, for me, the Hasblow versions are neithr show, nor toy accurate and thus worthless.
william-james88 wrote:Denying the importance of the toys is denying the essence of the brand and this hobby. Until 2007, Transformers was a toy brand first with any fiction made to simply sell toys.
Not just comics, but one could argue that even one of the cartoons, Beast Machines, was pretty light on the "To sell toys" aspect, what with how uncoordinated the show and toyline were with each other.Kurona wrote:william-james88 wrote:Denying the importance of the toys is denying the essence of the brand and this hobby. Until 2007, Transformers was a toy brand first with any fiction made to simply sell toys.
This isn't entirely to-the-letter true; IDW's Transformers comics - which have been around since October 2005 - never had the intention of selling toys and Hasbro never asked them to until 2008's All Hail Megatron. And I'm pretty sure Dreamwave wasn't made to sell toys either.
Other than that though, yeah, I agree completely.
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Sabrblade wrote:Not just comics, but one could argue that even one of the cartoons, Beast Machines, was pretty light on the "To sell toys" aspect, what with how uncoordinated the show and toyline were with each other.Kurona wrote:william-james88 wrote:Denying the importance of the toys is denying the essence of the brand and this hobby. Until 2007, Transformers was a toy brand first with any fiction made to simply sell toys.
This isn't entirely to-the-letter true; IDW's Transformers comics - which have been around since October 2005 - never had the intention of selling toys and Hasbro never asked them to until 2008's All Hail Megatron. And I'm pretty sure Dreamwave wasn't made to sell toys either.
Other than that though, yeah, I agree completely.
While true, I will bring up that the individual Dreamwave issues did include advertisements for the then-contemporary Generation One Commemorative Series toyline of TRU exclusives, among the other usual comic book ads.Kurona wrote:Though unlike BM, Dreamwave and IDW (until AHM) had absolutely no toyline behind them.
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Sabrblade wrote:While true, I will bring up that the individual Dreamwave issues did include advertisements for the then-contemporary Generation One Commemorative Series toyline of TRU exclusives, among the other usual comic book ads.Kurona wrote:Though unlike BM, Dreamwave and IDW (until AHM) had absolutely no toyline behind them.
william-james88 wrote:Sabrblade wrote:While true, I will bring up that the individual Dreamwave issues did include advertisements for the then-contemporary Generation One Commemorative Series toyline of TRU exclusives, among the other usual comic book ads.Kurona wrote:Though unlike BM, Dreamwave and IDW (until AHM) had absolutely no toyline behind them.
My main point is that these are secondary to the brand. And the comics wouldnt count as the same because it was (and is) licensed fiction. Hasbro doesnt make money from the comic book sales, they get it from licensing there, so its a different thing. My main point was that the shows cmissioned by hasbro are made to sell the toyline and that the toys were the main focal point of the TF Brand. We can at least agree on that and thus their importance, right?
william-james88 wrote:primalxconvoy wrote:
I have to disagree. Although G1 can get a pass for not being authentic to the cartoons, I have no empathy for the original Beast wars toys, as it was the SHOW thta was the "real" look, rather than the toys )toy-only molds nonwithstanding). Thus, for me, the Hasblow versions are neithr show, nor toy accurate and thus worthless.
How does G1 get a pass and not Beast Wars when its the same thing. Like G1, Beast Wars was a toyline first and a show second. Like G1, the show was just made to sell the toys and took liberties on how the toys looked in the first season.
Here are the actual initial character models for the Beast Wars show.
As you can see, they are far more toy based, showing what the show based itself on and what the initial mandate was.
Denying the importance of the toys is denying the essence of the brand and this hobby. Until 2007, Transformers was a toy brand first with any fiction made to simply sell toys. So homaging the true essence of this brand, the toys, has as much value than homaging the fiction.
primalxconvoy wrote:For Beast Wars, and especially the show characters, it was the show, not the original toys, that have given us our memories of what looks "right" about the figures. This means that "show accurate" will always trump "toy accurate" when it comes to the Western beast wars figures.
william-james88 wrote:Who the **** is "us"?! I dont mind argumentative discussion but I would rather you speak for yourself.
JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:And that brought me to an interesting thought. It's not about which one is red and which one is blue, it's all about what medium has ultimate authority: the toy line, or the cartoon. Unfortunately, that is all a matter of opinion...
Burn wrote:Agamemnon wrote:Let's get back to talking about Burn's mammoth snout flopping...
Well I am Australian. It's kinda what we're known for.
Perhaps "hyperbole"? Or "sweeping generalization"? One of those might be it.Seibertron wrote:There's a word that is eluding me that describes when someone makes overstatements by using all-inclusive words when making a statement such as everyone, all fans, everybody, majority of fans, etc. False-consensus isn't the word I'm looking for, but it's close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False-consensus_effect
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Though, Takara's lighter colors are closer to that end.Kurona wrote:The same cannot be said in the instance of, say, G1 Galvatron; he looked wildly different between the Cartoon and any other portrayal. Sure, we just got an incredible Voyager Galvatron in Titans Return... but it won't quite work for you if you wanted something more akin to Marvel's portrayal of the character.
Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Seibertron wrote:I feel that whichever was the most popular depiction of a character is what is perceived as the "right" look for many fans, whether it's the comics, cartoons, video games or the toys themselves. I believe that a lot of fans would probably prefer the look of the cartoon first and foremost. While that's true for myself, I also prefer a hybrid look that blends the best of both worlds.
Oftentimes the toys have far more detail than the animated or drawn version of the characters, so cartoon accuracy is my preference with heads and overall bodies but with the level of detail seen in the toys (or if the Transformers were real world, but not the live action film franchise's version of that).
Masterpiece Inferno is one that comes to mind that missed out on having additional details on his body paneling, but they got the overall look right on the toy. As for Beast Wars, the cartoon look would be superior to me because the toys were inconsistent initially (mutant heads which were quickly phased out on new molds after the first few waves) and because that's how they've been prominently portrayed in various fiction. However, I do like the nods to the toys. I think Masterpiece Optimus Primal would be absolutely brilliant if he came with the mutant head as a mask to put over the traditional Optimus Primal head (or at least a swappable head altogether).
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. There's a word that is eluding me that describes when someone makes overstatements by using all-inclusive words when making a statement such as everyone, all fans, everybody, majority of fans, etc. False-consensus isn't the word I'm looking for, but it's close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False-consensus_effect
Speaking of which, my use of the word "many" in the first paragraph of my post may possibly fall into that definition.
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], DarthFoozar, Freezie, Glyph, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]