|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 14, 2009 18:15:29 GMT
I'm very tempted by this expensive toy. However, I learnt, mere moments ago, from a review someone had done on play.com, that the individual Constructicons do not themselves transform into robots, only transform in order to combine!
What the hell?! How cheap is Hasbro?! Why couldn't they give us a 'proper' Constructicon set that transform into individual robots AND combine. It can't be an issue of design, look at how complex TFs are these days. It has got to be pure greed- they make us buy seperate individual Constructicons, and the Constructicon combiner set. Son of a bitch!
So I'm all of a fuddle. I really want a massive Devastator. But I'm disapointed the component parts do not individualy transform.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jul 14, 2009 18:40:54 GMT
I guess they thought it would collapse under the weight if they transformed individually.
Personally I'd have perferred a smaller Devastator
|
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 14, 2009 18:56:56 GMT
Smaller? NO NO NO!!!! Must be big! I love the size.
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Jul 14, 2009 19:19:35 GMT
So I'm all of a fuddle. I really want a massive Devastator. But I'm disapointed the component parts do not individualy transform. Although arguably that is movie accurate, as I do not believe that the construction vehicles that form Devastator are observed to transform into humanoid modes in the film either. There are other robots which appear to resemble the Constructicons elsewhere in the battle with the Marines and N.E.S.T troops simulataneously, making the textual evidence for the Devastator components having humanoid modes somewhat less certain. So it could be that the latter, transforming Constructicons, are the ones depicted by the individual Constructicon toys whilst Devastator is a single entity who disassembles into multiple construction vehicles when he transforms. (Yes, it is a fundamentally specious arguement, but I'm just speculating from what I can remember of the text. I could also be badly incorrect anyway as I am not making much of an effort to remember a great deal of the 2009 film in all honesty). Karl |
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 14, 2009 19:47:45 GMT
You only learned this moments ago? This is one of the reasons I have sworn off Transformers from the movie line like the plague. I would rather buy 666 Armada Sideswipe w/Nightbeat figures than any of these demented movie toys.
IMO there's no excuse for it. Weight, this that - this isn't 1984. This isn't 1999. This is 2009. There's stuff out there being manufactured that exceeds these silly Constructicons by leaps and bounds. And yet Hasbro wasn't able to come up with a transformation scheme for the gestalt combiner featured/starring in the new movie?
I honestly never thought it would get this bad.
Supreme Action Master Devastator Bunny...
And he's not even CUTE!
Pete
|
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 14, 2009 21:52:49 GMT
There's stuff out there being manufactured that exceeds these silly Constructicons by leaps and bounds. And yet Hasbro wasn't able to come up with a transformation scheme for the gestalt combiner featured/starring in the new movie? Pete Good point! Hasbro are being lazy me things. However...... |
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 14, 2009 21:54:44 GMT
Although arguably that is movie accurate, as I do not believe that the construction vehicles that form Devastator are observed to transform into humanoid modes in the film either. There are other robots which appear to resemble the Constructicons elsewhere in the battle with the Marines and N.E.S.T troops simulataneously, making the textual evidence for the Devastator components having humanoid modes somewhat less certain. So it could be that the latter, transforming Constructicons, are the ones depicted by the individual Constructicon toys whilst Devastator is a single entity who disassembles into multiple construction vehicles when he transforms. (Yes, it is a fundamentally specious arguement, but I'm just speculating from what I can remember of the text. I could also be badly incorrect anyway as I am not making much of an effort to remember a great deal of the 2009 film in all honesty). Karl This is a good point. And may well explain the numerous 'Constructicon' type Decepticons running around in the movie. |
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 14, 2009 23:09:39 GMT
I've heard the argument made before that there are some Constructicons who turn into individual robots and others who just combine into Devastator. Given what people claim is seen on screen (and I haven't seen it), I am willing to believe it.
But that - to me - is just more proof that ROTF stinks. How could they possible have figured it would be somehow a good idea to make Devastator a bunch of random construction vehicles that turn into a rabbit and have no individual robot modes?
Beyond that - let's take it at face value. Fine.
But now... look at supreme Devastator. Shoddy detailing, shoddy paintjob, shoddy poseability. It's a lump.
Since there are no individual robot modes, then they could have given this thing hydraulics, pistons, intricate detail - the works. They could have justified "no individual robot modes" by giving us a rendition of movie Devastator in the supreme class that was eye popping.
This thing looks like an over-sized Macdonalds happy meal exclusive.
No excuse.
Pete
|
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 15, 2009 14:54:08 GMT
I do deffo agree with what you've said there Pete, even if I'm willing to except seperate Constructicon individuals and seperate vehicles forming Dev. The pics/vids I've seen of Devastator lead me to feel that there is a lot about this toy that could- should- have been done better.
I still want one though! I'm such a whore for huge Transformers!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 15, 2009 18:10:34 GMT
|
|
Nigel
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 5,098
|
Post by Nigel on Jul 15, 2009 18:37:36 GMT
You hadn't thought of it? Tsk, tsk. I remember discussing that idea on here ages ago.
A nice repaint, that.
|
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 15, 2009 18:40:44 GMT
I dunno. I'm sitting here building my version 2.0 1:100 Mastergrade Jim, and marveling at pistons in the shoulders, four hydraulics in the ankles, three points of articulation in the feet, perfect resemblance to the animation line art and wondering why anybody in their right mind would pay more than a pound for ROTF Devastator. I will grant that lots of the ROTF toys have good moulds in robot mode (although the vehicle modes, particularly for the jets, are hideous) - but Hasbro has done NOTHING to actually highlight the details on their moulds with proper paint aps. It's just unpainted plastic glued and screwed together quickly at the factory. In fact, when I consider that Supreme Devastator costs basically a hundred pounds... and think about what other things are available out there for a hundred pounds. I mean - at least the G1 Diaclone/Scramble City toys were top of the line for their time. Sure, now they are "bricks" and have many flaws - but that's just because technology advanced, not because Takara were lazy. This horrible abomination of a toy line that started with the first movie line and continues today is something that truly saddens me. I mean - it's not even the Bayformers designs which I honestly think look great on the big screen. It's the toys - that look nothing like those designs, but rather like KOs. I dunno. I'm a big TF fan. I should be excited and in love with this movie line. I should be satisfied that the Constructicons - such legendary cult classics - are in the movie. Instead, I'm just thinking it's time to stop dreaming that one day something will actually be made that will ever be on par with G1 or BW...  Pete |
|
|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Jul 15, 2009 19:49:04 GMT
The legends version does both
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Jul 15, 2009 19:52:03 GMT
me want
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Jul 15, 2009 20:04:46 GMT
I must admit I haven't bought very many of the toys from either of the live action movies. (In fact I have purchased more toys from the movie line that were repaints of toys from other lines than which were new molds). With the first film I felt that the designs were perfectly serviceable on screen - not my thing, but then I am a bit Votoms/Diaclone/Mospeada kind of retro in how I want my stompy mecha to look so a lot of newer stuff leaves this old-timer feeling confused. I remember this time when we were facing the Petro-Rabbits of Cygnus Alph... anyway, where was I?
Oh yes, the 2007 movie designs I felt worked reasonably well on screen but didn't do much for me as toys. With the 2009 line I retain a bit of a sense of that but I've also found that those toys that I have bought have felt that bit cheaper in terms of their build quality than their counterparts from two years previously (quality of the plastic, slightly-iffy parts fit and one basic that was badly scratched before I even opened it).
It doesn't give me any real confidence that a £100 ROFD toy is going to approach £100 in terms of value. (I was never planning to buy the large Devastator anyway, but if I had been then the fact that the rest of the line has a lot of toys that feel rather small, and less well made than previous lines would likely have changed my mind).
Means that they could have Devastator at one location, whilst using the Constructicon animation models in the parallel scene - thus giving them more robots in play at any given time. Much the same as they reason that some of the remainder of the Decepticons in the final action sequence seem to be basically genericbots who just advance and shoot (I figure they should just have painted them tan and called them CF's). From that point of view it makes a lot of sense. Render and design time is money and if you want to have a lot of stompy robots in play then if you can find ways to reuse things you have already designed and assembled then it is only good film-making economics.
Karl
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 15, 2009 20:05:10 GMT
Don't despair, Pete. Universe is still coming out in dribs and drabs as store exclusives (looks like), and Encore is still going strong.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 15, 2009 20:07:29 GMT
It is an amazing homage in truck mould. Curious to see how the robot mode holds up.
-Ralph
|
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 15, 2009 20:21:30 GMT
I've just been going very emo lately. Maybe it's the weather?  Pete |
|
|
|
Post by grahamthomson on Jul 16, 2009 7:23:11 GMT
It's just a toy, eh?
However, there may yet be hope.
Consider: Aside from Jazz, almost all of the character models from the first film were reused in ROTF. The models are far too expensive to use for such limited screen time. I am sure Devastator will be back for TF3... and that gives Hasbro et al plenty of time to engineer a transforming-and-combining Constructicon team.
The film designs are worked on right until the last minute, but the toys need to be engineered a year in advance, so Hasbro have to juggle getting product out in time and making it match what's on screen. Look at Leader Optimus and Starscream... they were much improved on the second try.
Count ourselves lucky... in 2011 it'll be an inflatable Unicron for £199 we'll be disappointed about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 16, 2009 14:47:09 GMT
You are wise indeed, Tomo.
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamthomson on Jul 17, 2009 20:49:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Jul 17, 2009 21:11:16 GMT
Wait, what, is that real, official, to buy, I can own?
Andy
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jul 17, 2009 21:26:21 GMT
The only true Devastator is the Action Master Devastator!
-Ralph
|
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 17, 2009 22:09:04 GMT
That's EZ Devastator by Takara-Tomy. He's ace, but he's also in legends size class...
I agree with Ralph. Actionmaster Devastator is, aside from G1, probably the most perfect Transformer out there.
And for the record - IF they package Supreme Devastator with the following accessories - I will buy it:
1. Internal Meat Grinder in Mixmaster for Sausages
2. A pile of sausages to fit on Longhaul
3. Some sausages for the others to carry round in their shovels
4. Ketchup
That is all I ask.
Pete
|
|
Hero
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
King of RULES!
Everything Rules
Posts: 7,487
|
Post by Hero on Jul 17, 2009 23:54:49 GMT
Devastator is a decoupage of construction vehicles |
|
|
|
Post by grahamthomson on Jul 18, 2009 7:10:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Benn on Jul 18, 2009 9:30:35 GMT
Consider: Aside from Jazz, almost all of the character models from the first film were reused in ROTF. The models are far too expensive to use for such limited screen time. I am sure Devastator will be back for TF3... and that gives Hasbro et al plenty of time to engineer a transforming-and-combining Constructicon team. Yeah, but they've had a while to improve on the old film designs as well.. and in Bumblybee's case they've made him worse, whilst in Barricade, Brawl and Jazz/Smokescreen's cases they're just plain old lazy reissues. If Devvy turns up in TF3, we'll just get this crap trotted out at us again. The toyline isn't a total bust, I have to add, Sideswipe is good, and I'm hoping that Jolt will be pretty good as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jul 19, 2009 16:41:15 GMT
WOW!!!! That looks freakin' fantastic! How's he done that? |
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Jul 19, 2009 18:45:58 GMT
The same way somebody else did this:  The problem is, in niether case was the perpetrator Hasbro. Takara-Tomy have done wht they could with Buster Prime - but in the end, something is missing. My guess would be that it is just becoming too expensive for Hasbro to mass produce something like this AND take care of giving it a decent paint job? I dunno... In any case - for shame. For shame... Pete |
|
|
|
Post by grahamthomson on Jul 19, 2009 18:59:18 GMT
That looks like a www.frenzyrumble.com custom. His stuff is amazing! But to be fair, when have mass produced Transformers ever had such detailed paint applications? |
|
