Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

I am now perfectly fine with Hasbro's Blurr now that I know why they did those colors. I am happier that ever now. The g1 toy also has the weird removable nosecone/shield thing that the TR one has which is awesome.

Now now, let's not pretend that the G1 Blurr didn't have an incredibly bland color scheme, shall we?

Except it doesnt. Its a nice coincidence that their lack of paint apps happens to look like some parts of he toy but hey end up not giving us the right tones for half the figure, like it's back which ends up just being the same colour as the sides of the vehicle which is not at all like the G1 toy:



The whole point of the G1 toy was that the back would be the same colour as the cockpit area making a nice contrast with the sides. That entire mix of colours is lost on this new Blurr where he back half of his vehicle mode is just a blur of unpainted blue. A mix of plastic tones could have really helped.

Sabrblade wrote:Now now, let's not pretend that the G1 Blurr didn't have an incredibly bland color scheme, shall we?

True, but it makes the TR one more tolerable.

SillySpringer wrote:but it makes the TR one more tolerable.

Will's anaylsis above seems to indicate otherwise.

Sabrblade wrote:

SillySpringer wrote:but it makes the TR one more tolerable.

Will's anaylsis above seems to indicate otherwise.

Will's opinion doesn't matter!

SillySpringer wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

SillySpringer wrote:but it makes the TR one more tolerable.

Will's anaylsis above seems to indicate otherwise.

Will's opinion doesn't matter!

Not an opinion, just a fact. TR Blurr doesnt have the same colour mix as G1 and the back half is all the same colour. The rest is happy coincidence:




Transformers G1 1986 Blurr Gallery

Hasbro even confirmed that the deco is up to the designer and is not indicative of specific references all the time, cant find that quote though at the moment. Anyways, just look at the two, the choice of colour is very different and it is not a faithful colour homage in the least. G1 has 5 different colour tones from dark blue to white, TR has 3.

I still don't see the issue with his vehicle mode. It looks like Blurr to me, and his robot mode has some obvious G1 toy references in it. (Such as the darker painted lower legs and red triangles painted on the shins.) I find this toy to look quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the original toy, especially in robot mode. And the butt of the car doesn't bother me. It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

SillySpringer wrote:I still don't see the issue with his vehicle mode. It looks like Blurr to me, and his robot mode has some obvious G1 toy references in it. (Such as the darker painted lower legs and red triangles painted on the shins.) I find this toy to look quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the original toy, especially in robot mode. And the butt of the car doesn't bother me. It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

The problem is that hasbro gave this figure (a highly anticipated figure) a crappy lazy paint job that effectively ruins the figure for a lot of people, especially when it's compared to the Legends version

SillySpringer wrote: It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

You could have precised that initially because that is very different than what you wrote on the other page where you stated that the colours closely matched the G1 toy. Some colours in some places match, yes, but we noticed that when it was initially revealed. Hasbro designers have a habit of refering to the toy for colours and detail (my favourite recent toy homage was cw vortex and his colourful chest)

Does Squeezeplay's head mode look like a femme to you guys too?

Thing is, even if it is homaging the g1 toy... Still looks kinda shite.

I'll deffo be getting this figure


& here's a look at Blurr


& Skullsmasher & Scourge

LieutenantRedWing wrote:Does Squeezeplay's head mode look like a femme to you guys too?

If you mean by the color scheme, Squeezeplay's G1 toy head was pink too.

Hellscream9999 wrote:

SillySpringer wrote:I still don't see the issue with his vehicle mode. It looks like Blurr to me, and his robot mode has some obvious G1 toy references in it. (Such as the darker painted lower legs and red triangles painted on the shins.) I find this toy to look quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the original toy, especially in robot mode. And the butt of the car doesn't bother me. It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

The problem is that hasbro gave this figure (a highly anticipated figure) a crappy lazy paint job that effectively ruins the figure for a lot of people, especially when it's compared to the Legends version

It's hasbro. News flash they base CHUG color schemes on the original toys and comics. They've been doing it for ten years now all the way back to 2006 when classics started and only rarely would go with a cartoon-like scheme. Get over it already man. Be thankful you have an option with takara and be thankful takara is doing cartoon accuracy with their color schemes. You could be getting what they did with United and animated 4-6 years ago with shiny metallic paint that wasn't accurate or arms micron with 2 paint apps and a sticker sheet.

I guess I'm really lucky that blurr's colour scheme doesn't bother me in the slightest but again, it's good that we have a choice for those who do want a g1 colour scheme.

Really they could of painted him a mix of greens and I would of still bought him as he is a cool looking toy.

However, I don't count his paint as lazy, I believe they did what they could on the budget so the bosses could keep their profit margins. I've said it before but ill say it again here, I bet there's plenty of people within the tf department of hasbro that wish they could go to town on these but I think their hands are tied by the higher ups. It's all money at the end of the day.

Randomhero wrote:

Hellscream9999 wrote:

SillySpringer wrote:I still don't see the issue with his vehicle mode. It looks like Blurr to me, and his robot mode has some obvious G1 toy references in it. (Such as the darker painted lower legs and red triangles painted on the shins.) I find this toy to look quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the original toy, especially in robot mode. And the butt of the car doesn't bother me. It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

The problem is that hasbro gave this figure (a highly anticipated figure) a crappy lazy paint job that effectively ruins the figure for a lot of people, especially when it's compared to the Legends version

It's hasbro. News flash they base CHUG color schemes on the original toys and comics. They've been doing it for ten years now all the way back to 2006 when classics started and only rarely would go with a cartoon-like scheme. Get over it already man. Be thankful you have an option with takara and be thankful takara is doing cartoon accuracy with their color schemes. You could be getting what they did with United and animated 4-6 years ago with shiny metallic paint that wasn't accurate or arms micron with 2 paint apps and a sticker sheet.

Take a hint, it's not just me, Kurona and William-James - among many others - have already stated they feel the same way... maybe it's time to just admit hasbro skimped on the figure

Hellscream9999 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Hellscream9999 wrote:

SillySpringer wrote:I still don't see the issue with his vehicle mode. It looks like Blurr to me, and his robot mode has some obvious G1 toy references in it. (Such as the darker painted lower legs and red triangles painted on the shins.) I find this toy to look quite aesthetically pleasing compared to the original toy, especially in robot mode. And the butt of the car doesn't bother me. It may not be a complete mirror of the original toy in color, but you can see some of the artist's homages in there. I was mostly referring to the darker color-scheme in robot mode rather than the full color palate comparison.

The problem is that hasbro gave this figure (a highly anticipated figure) a crappy lazy paint job that effectively ruins the figure for a lot of people, especially when it's compared to the Legends version

It's hasbro. News flash they base CHUG color schemes on the original toys and comics. They've been doing it for ten years now all the way back to 2006 when classics started and only rarely would go with a cartoon-like scheme. Get over it already man. Be thankful you have an option with takara and be thankful takara is doing cartoon accuracy with their color schemes. You could be getting what they did with United and animated 4-6 years ago with shiny metallic paint that wasn't accurate or arms micron with 2 paint apps and a sticker sheet.

Take a hint, it's not just me, Kurona and William-James - among many others - have already stated they feel the same way... maybe it's time to just admit hasbro skimped on the figure

And how's it going so far? Being an adult complaining about toy working out well?

It's a toy man. Again you have choices. Whining on a message board about paint on a toy does nothing. It's how they've chosen to make them for 10 years.

And didn't this start with SillySpringer opining that the Hasbro color scheme based on the original toy made it easier to accept the Hasbro offering...for SillySpringer? I think it's natural to debate whether or not one prefers Hasbro's scheme over Takara, but I found the opinion that Silly was wrong to be a bit overboard. We each can choose for ourselves how we want to justify our purchases. I found Silly's reasoning to be sound and wish him happiness on making the choice!

I'm fine if someone prefers one over another but to continuously complain and whine about it does nothing. You don't like it? Great! Move on but calling something you're not entitled to in the slightest "ruined" or repetitively insulting a company that created our childhoods by always accusing them of being lazy is ridiculous

It's makes me ashamed sometimes to be part of the fandom with people that do that.

Randomhero wrote:I'm fine if someone prefers one over another but to continuously complain and whine about it does nothing. You don't like it? Great! Move on but calling something you're not entitled to in the slightest "ruined" or repetitively insulting a company that created our childhoods by always accusing them of being lazy is ridiculous

It's makes me ashamed sometimes to be part of the fandom with people that do that.

I think you're getting a little bit too... mad about this whole thing.
I get that you're probably a little annoyed seeing the same complaint everywhere, but it's a valid criticism and a widely-shared opinion - ie something that's right at home on a forum meant for discussing it. I'm not saying people can't like it, I'm not saying that expressing this opinion will change anything, I'm just saying I think it looks shite.

Randomhero wrote:I'm fine if someone prefers one over another but to continuously complain and whine about it does nothing. You don't like it? Great! Move on but calling something you're not entitled to in the slightest "ruined" or repetitively insulting a company that created our childhoods by always accusing them of being lazy is ridiculous

So they made some toys 30 years ago that were nifty, doesn't excuse them from criticism indefinitely, might wanna get off your soapbox, this is a valid criticism, held by many (if not most on here) on a discussion forum

Everyone is entitled to their opinions on these toys and everyone has the right to voice an opinion, bad or good. We may not like it when people don't agree with us but it's it's what happens. As long as nobody is actually being insulting about someone else who likes/dislikes the toy then we need need to realise it's not personal.

Agamemnnon is right this started because silly had justified, to himself, why he was now okay with hasbro blurr and more power to him for it. His reasoning may of been flawed but it's his alone.

But I'm still buying Hasbro Blurr (Hasblurr?), so yeppers!

Hellscream9999 wrote:Take a hint, it's not just me, Kurona and William-James - among many others - have already stated they feel the same way... maybe it's time to just admit hasbro skimped on the figure

But I dont really care and I think we are beating a dead horse. I know Hasbro is tied up with their priorities so I just buy the Takara version instead. I just vote with my wallet and move on.

The only reason I spoke up earlier was because I wanted to point out to what extent Hasbro was referencing the toy deco since it wasnt clear and I wanted people to be well informed. I am also glad it makes people like this toy more, Hasbro needs to sell toys to show that there is still a demand and if we all go Takara like me, then Hasbro loses sales and who knows what might happen next. And I dont mind referencing the toy deco but I am more of a go big or go home kind of guy so if they are going for the toy deco, then I would have preffered a more faithful mix of tones.