|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 25, 2012 20:53:29 GMT
So, you're demanding I validate myself with "Basis" for my "claim," so should you as well. Why are Marvel Grimlock, Sunbow Grimlock, and Dreamwave Grimlock all G1 I never said they were. I don't think I referred to "G1" or Dreamwave in anything I said. I don't use the term "G1" for anything because it never existed in the period when I loved TFs the most (1984 to 1992). It was only coined much later, when they started having reboots/rehashes of the TF comic or cartoon saga. And I wasn't demanding, just asking, because you said "these are all the same basic characters", and while some are indeed similar characters in the reboot universe, I was disputing the "all" in your sentence, since many of them, like Cyclonus, Fortress Maximus, Skids and Ultra Magnus have nothing in common except the name and look. They most definitely do not fill the same niche, to use your term. All Grimlocks, Wolverines, etc. are distinct characters, but reusing elements of existing characters according to the whims of the writers. You'd be right to say some are variations on existing characters (some, but not all). I just wish writers would let existing works stand as they are and write their new characters with new names so as to be original, not confuse fans of the existing characters and not gain unfair advantages over competitors trying to start something entirely from scratch. But money / brand loyalty talks. But I don't think we're disagreeing about facts, just definitions. To me, a character is a well-defined single fictional person - to you, it's a family of fictional people who share a single name and maybe some other broad features. Using your definition I couldn't answer Shockprowl's original question, because I don't have affections for particular broad groups of characters (like all the TFs called Prowl, or all the TFs called Grimlock) - I consider each one separately. I just don't understand why folk get attached to characters in the broader sense and are thus upset if someone does a new character with the same name and look, but in a way they don't like. I only care about specific characters and what happens to them - I'm indifferent to how the names and looks are recycled in reboot universes. Never mind, and merry Christmas! Martin |
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Dec 26, 2012 1:36:05 GMT
But I don't think we're disagreeing about facts, just definitions. To me, a character is a well-defined single fictional person - to you, it's a family of fictional people who share a single name and maybe some other broad features. Using your definition I couldn't answer Shockprowl's original question, because I don't have affections for particular broad groups of characters (like all the TFs called Prowl, or all the TFs called Grimlock) - I consider each one separately. Okay, I can go along with that, and I think you figured out the wall we were hitting. As for this: "Using your definition I couldn't answer Shockprowl's original question, because I don't have affections for particular broad groups of characters" That's why I specified which version. For instance, I love the Marvel Dinobots, and IDW Dinobots, but can't stand the Sunbow Dinobots. For me, "ruining" a character is taking a character designed one way, making an updated version that's identical in every physical way, in a simular setting, then giving it a personality that is completely different. It's like if they started a new Batman cartoon, only in this one Batman, who is still Bruce Wayne, and runs around and has no problem shooting people. It's like if the new updated version of the original set of transformers (Since you don't like using "G1," I just find it easier, since it establishes instantly what era the user is speaking about) had Beachcomber running around who was now a crack shot, and fairly violent. That pretty much goes against the core principals the "Brand" as you say, of Beachcomber was founded on. At least for me, it is. I can't say quite the same about Grimlock, because stupid apron-wearing clown, or highly intellegent but borderline thug, neither really contridict the core principal of the character. But more over, "ruined" is a matter of personal taste. McCarthy ruined Perceptor by making him not be an uber geeky scientist, and instead making him into a badass. He also ruined Drift, who was a brand new character to the franchise. He also ruined what Nick Roche had so wonderfully set up for that continuity's Kup. I make no delusions that "ruined" isn't subjective. Also, if this particular message is choppy or more unintelligable than usual, I appologize. "The Angels Take Manhatten" is on. |
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 26, 2012 9:13:25 GMT
Also, if this particular message is choppy or more unintelligable than usual, I appologize. No, it reads very sensibly. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Dec 26, 2012 19:46:27 GMT
McCarthy...He also ruined Drift, who was a brand new character to the franchise. How can McCarthy ruin his own character? He created him and wrote his first appearance. There was nothing to 'ruin' yet! That's utter nonsense! -Ralph |
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 27, 2012 9:38:51 GMT
Also, if this particular message is choppy or more unintelligable than usual, I appologize. No, it reads very sensibly. Martin McCarthy...He also ruined Drift, who was a brand new character to the franchise. How can McCarthy ruin his own character? He created him and wrote his first appearance. There was nothing to 'ruin' yet! That's utter nonsense! -Ralph OK then, sensibly apart from that bit. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Dec 27, 2012 23:02:06 GMT
McCarthy...He also ruined Drift, who was a brand new character to the franchise. How can McCarthy ruin his own character? He created him and wrote his first appearance. There was nothing to 'ruin' yet! That's utter nonsense! -Ralph Not really, it's a jab at his writing abilities. I'm saying he's such a bad writer, that he can't even do his own mary sue well. Which is true. Drift is one of the blandest, yet overhyped characters in a loooong time. It's not nonsense. It's me being snarky. |
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jan 3, 2013 21:12:26 GMT
This question makes my brain explode. I love them all! ... umm... all the original ones that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jan 12, 2013 15:03:18 GMT
IDW has never, ever claimed that their core continuity is Generation One. In fact, when the series first began and they got complaints about some of the changes they made, quite often they would come along and repeat "Because this isn't Generation One".
On topic;
Marvel
Optimus Prime
Jazz
Goldbug
Grimlock
Nightbeat
Galvatron
Shockwave
Carnivac
Thunderwing
Flywheels
Sunbow
Optimus Prime
Jazz
Bumblebee
Warpath
Smokescreen
Megatron
Starscream
Breakdown
Beast Wars
Rattrap
Dinobot
Megatron
Tarantulas
Inferno
Beast Wars IDW
Razorbeast
Snarl
Stampy
Magmatron
Beast Machines
Thrust
Dreamwave
Shockwave
Animated
Ratchet
Blurr
Animated 3.0
Sideswipe
Ransack
War For Cybertron
Warpath
Fall Of Cybertron
Jazz
Prime
Ratchet
IDW
Optimus Prime
Ratchet
Jazz
Nightbeat
Brainstorm
Whirl
Ironfist
Megatron
Shockwave
Starscream
Overlord
Anything I've missed out is either because I never really stuck with them or because none of the characters were memorable...
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jan 12, 2013 15:58:39 GMT
IDW has never, ever claimed that their core continuity is Generation One. In fact, when the series first began and they got complaints about some of the changes they made, quite often they would come along and repeat "Because this isn't Generation One". *snip* I'll agree with a lot of that, but I think there's the danger that people talk about liking character X because they liked them in G1. Lots of people talk about liking Prime Bulkhead, for example, but do they actually mean they liked Animated Bulkhead, especially given that Bulkhead doesnt really seem to do anything or have a personality in Prime. I mean, I look at your IDW list, and I honestly can't recall anything particularly iconic about any portrayal of Prime, Nightbeat, Jazz, Megatron and Starscream. If no other continuity had existed, would they really be the top tier of characters? I think it would be all of the Ironfists and Overlords, the guys who actually got personalities and did interesting things. I know you say IDW isn't G1, but really, it is. Most of it (especially after Furman left) requires a working knowledge of G1 because it is very much in the language of "here is character X, he is important because you remember him from G1." This is more the AHM / Costa era, but it was a long era! A lot of the popularity of characters in modern day TF series seem like they're just coasting on past glories. Especially Prime. I couldn't even begin to tell you about most of their characters in that show* despite it having over 50 episodes, but, you know they were about in G1 so are automatically cool. *Apart from Ratchet, he actually has a distinct personality. |
|
|
|
Post by Kingoji on Jan 12, 2013 18:07:39 GMT
I'll agree with a lot of that, but I think there's the danger that people talk about liking character X because they liked them in G1. Lots of people talk about liking Prime Bulkhead, for example, but do they actually mean they liked Animated Bulkhead, especially given that Bulkhead doesnt really seem to do anything or have a personality in Prime. I mean, I look at your IDW list, and I honestly can't recall anything particularly iconic about any portrayal of Prime, Nightbeat, Jazz, Megatron and Starscream. If no other continuity had existed, would they really be the top tier of characters? I think it would be all of the Ironfists and Overlords, the guys who actually got personalities and did interesting things. I know you say IDW isn't G1, but really, it is. Most of it (especially after Furman left) requires a working knowledge of G1 because it is very much in the language of "here is character X, he is important because you remember him from G1." This is more the AHM / Costa era, but it was a long era! A lot of the popularity of characters in modern day TF series seem like they're just coasting on past glories. Especially Prime. I couldn't even begin to tell you about most of their characters in that show* despite it having over 50 episodes, but, you know they were about in G1 so are automatically cool. *Apart from Ratchet, he actually has a distinct personality. I see where you're coming from and agree for the most part... but I do genuinely judge my list based on the impact the character had on *me*, not necessarily needing to be plot-important, in the individual series I list. That's why Jazz doesn't make the grade in Animated, despite being practically the same entity he always was; because from what Animated offered *me*, Jazz wasn't very impressive. But yeah... one of my long-standing complaints with the IDW-verse is that it didn't plunder EVERY TF iteration that came before it for a very long time, and now only occasionally does so (Lockdown, Skybyte, etc). That's partially why I set that Rattrap comic in the IDW universe, and also included Ransack from TF: Cybertron. |
|
Jim
Thunderjet
Micromaster Backside Monitor
Now in glorious Ultra HD 4K
Posts: 4,687
|
Post by Jim on Jan 12, 2013 18:41:47 GMT
*Apart from Ratchet, he actually has a distinct personality. Ratchet generally does quite well; he was a favourite of the G1 comics, US and UK (and one reason why RG1 doesn't sit completely comfortably for me), great in Animated and what little I've seen of Prime (Jeffrey Combs!) and also in IDW under Furman and Roberts. Choosing a list for myself is difficult right now as it would be dominated by the two current IDW ongoings, and I'd hate it to look like I just had a short memory, but Prowl, Starscream, Whirl and Swerve's current depictions will stay with me for the long term I think. |
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Jan 12, 2013 18:42:11 GMT
For me every series is a separate entity with the exception of Marvel US and UK simply because 90+% of the US takes place in the UK too, if a character had had significant personality differences it would have made very little sense.
But everything else can go crazy. Even Sunbow which is based on the same original bible take very different approaches from Marvel with characters like Shockwave. And no wonder Transformers there were a slave race built by quintessons and Unicron was built by a computer geek.
Even though at that one point when the comic and the cartoon began, very similar events were taking place the universes and the histories are so radically different I have no reason to expect characters to behave the same.
IDW probably could have helped themselves by incorporating a lot more non G1 characters from the start to lessen the sense of a G1 rehash. But I have always taken IDW to be as unique from G1 as the Movies, animated or Prime are. Infact I would say that Prime is a lot closer to the movies than IDW is to G1.
So having said that in no particular order
Gears (my head with some thanks to marvel)
Powerflash (my head)
Streetwise (my head)
Actionmaster Thundercracker (my head)
Freewheeler (my head again)
Ratchet (Marvel)
Ratchet (animated)
Ratchet (Prime)
Bulkhead (Animated)
Bulkhead (Prime - gotta disagree with Matt here, while I cant decide why I like this version of the character)
Rattrap (Beast Wars)
Quickstrike (Beast Wars)
Skybyte (RID)
Scourge (Cybertron)
theres probably lots more
|
|
|
|
Post by Benn on Jan 12, 2013 20:41:30 GMT
Since attending AA, my G1 faves seem to be 'guys that I've met'. Or the toys that're cool.
Sooo.
1. Jazz. (That toy... I love it.)
2. Streetwise. (again, for some reason I like the Toy. And the Christmas story he was in was damn fun too)
3. Hound. (For his cartoon portrayal, mostly.)
4. Mirage. (not sure why, I wasn't an F1 fan when he came out so something must have drawn me to him...)
5. Hot Rod. (I liked him in the Movie and was actually pretty annoyed he got turned into a Prime.)
I guess the others, such as IDW would have to be a seperate list, as to me, they are seperate characters.
|
|
