|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Dec 2, 2013 14:51:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Dec 2, 2013 16:53:41 GMT
{Spoiler}Be that a two headed Swoop?
And B'bee in it again. I am shocked, shocked I say. |
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Dec 2, 2013 21:17:59 GMT
What kind of awful names are those? Is that their names?
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Dec 2, 2013 21:29:23 GMT
Those are either placeholder names, identity concealer names, or Bay names.
Mind you Bay doesnt give a shit about giving them proper names. Hence "Wheelbot" in RotF (whom is properly called Demolishor), and "Q" and "Dino" in DotM.
Unless they get a decent amount of screentime with human characters talking to them, virtually no transformer gets a proper name in the films themselves, and none get mentioned by name.
One could argue that it might be name trademark issues, and hasbro not wanting to worry about proper names until toys are ready to market, but i genuinely think its 90% that Bay doesnt care.
|
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Dec 3, 2013 13:00:10 GMT
Honestly so far these look terribad.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Dec 3, 2013 16:46:08 GMT
Hard to judge without context. Could be a secondary basic line aimed at younger kiddies.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Dec 3, 2013 18:16:39 GMT
I believe these are intended to be the new fast action battlers slot. However with hasbro thinking kids are stupid and dumbing down the mainline so much , it *is* hard to tell without context, like has been said.
|
|
Nigel
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 5,110
|
Post by Nigel on Jan 23, 2014 10:15:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Benn on Jan 23, 2014 11:15:14 GMT
Ha... nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Jan 23, 2014 11:23:16 GMT
Ah, Prime. Still bringing a knife to a gunfight I see...
Not my sort of thing at all. Not that I expected it to be really given the track record of the Live Action movie lines.
Karl
|
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Jan 23, 2014 11:28:58 GMT
Isuspect I will like how prime looks in the movie, but the toys not for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shockprowl on Jan 23, 2014 11:42:40 GMT
Aaand it's a big pass from this handsome young Transformers fan!
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Jan 23, 2014 19:04:56 GMT
And that thing costs almost $70 bucks. Massive pass.
$20 voyager seems reasonable, but not $64.
Transformation seems rubbish, but at least it looks like it has standard articulation.
So far, i like the movie designs a lot better this go around (optimus's idiotic "upgraded" alt mode aside), but this new simpler strategy is gonna kill the toys.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Jan 23, 2014 19:11:09 GMT
I can't believe how cheap that looks. They couldn't even be bothered to paint in the cab window on a $60 toy
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Jan 23, 2014 20:06:58 GMT
I honestly think this "we need to make TFs stupid simple for kids" line they're towing now to justify these changes are a complete bullshit cover, with all these changes really being cost cutting moves.
And here's why i think this.
Prime was already really simple, with a tiny handful that werent (dreadwing). And with Beast Hunters they got even simpler. I mean, you don't get any simpler than "stand the damn toy up to transform it," like virtually all of the dragons. The spychangers and many legends are more complex toys than the predacons. Tell me how they're too hard for children?
Meanwhile, the new toys coming out that are literally scaled up legions lack paint, lack articulation, and seem to focus on making as few moving parts as possible by molding as much into solid pieces as they can. Meanwhile, by virtue of being based on legions, they possess more complicated transformations than the very toys that are being left behind as "too complicated."
In the past, all of these things have been attributed to cost cutting measures, and had nothing to do with thinking kids are stupid.
There are tons of things they could do to streamline toys without sacrificing quality. Going back to beast era style engineering would be one, where ball joints are used more than multipart ratchet joints, and are more used in transformation. I dont recall anyone thinking Cheetor or Razorclaw (the crab) are too difficult. Or MW Mirage. I also dont recall feeling like the designers thought I was stupid by the simplicity of their designs, when I was a kid like I would have with BH Skystalker or Grimwing.
So yeah, I don't buy the "kids are stupid, we need to dumb it down" line. It just doesnt work. Especially when they're leaving even simpler toys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Jan 23, 2014 20:23:16 GMT
I think even a lot of the newer toys have been, not to complex, but too time consuming to make good toys to be played with. I don't like the simplification but I do understand the reason for it, even if it is a cover for cost cutting.
So far I am deeply unimpressed with the whole thing though.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 24, 2014 17:27:02 GMT
As am I.
-Ralph
|
|
kayevcee
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
The Weather Wizard
Posts: 5,527
|
Post by kayevcee on Jan 24, 2014 20:51:16 GMT
I don't think "cover" is the right word. They're killing two birds with one stone- simplifying movie figures means they're more accessible to kids who don't have the patience to spend half an hour struggling with each character, and fewer parts means less tooling and persumably lower costs.
The last movie figure I transformed was ROTF Optimus Prime. It's a remarkable rendition of the on-screen character, but actually trying to play with the thing is a nightmare. I expect a certain level of complexity, maybe even unintuitiveness from a Masterpiece figure aimed at collectors who have plenty of experience (and don't transform their figures as often), but on a mainline toy aimed at kids aged 5+? No. It's too much. I remember many a living room floor battle over the years, and if I had a figure that took ten minutes to get into vehicle mode, it would not be involved.
That said, this new Prime figure looks pretty tragic in both modes.
-Nick
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 24, 2014 22:29:02 GMT
Don't remind me about ROTF Leader Prime. I still wake up during the night screaming about it and shaking my sweat-filled fist at the heavens.
-Ralph
|
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Jan 24, 2014 22:41:28 GMT
Nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Jan 25, 2014 0:31:20 GMT
I don't think "cover" is the right word. They're killing two birds with one stone- simplifying movie figures means they're more accessible to kids who don't have the patience to spend half an hour struggling with each character, and fewer parts means less tooling and persumably lower costs. The last movie figure I transformed was ROTF Optimus Prime. It's a remarkable rendition of the on-screen character, but actually trying to play with the thing is a nightmare. I expect a certain level of complexity, maybe even unintuitiveness from a Masterpiece figure aimed at collectors who have plenty of experience (and don't transform their figures as often), but on a mainline toy aimed at kids aged 5+? No. It's too much. I remember many a living room floor battle over the years, and if I had a figure that took ten minutes to get into vehicle mode, it would not be involved. That said, this new Prime figure looks pretty tragic in both modes. -Nick I have nothing against designs being simpler than the rotf line. Many of those were friggin' insane. Its the over-simplification that gets me, as some of them are soooo simple, that when combined with hasbro constantly railing against minor complexity comes across feeling like they're saying kids are stupid. And quite frankly, they're not. When i was five and six, I was transforming any TF you put in front of me. Granted many G1s really aren't that hard, but some like the dinobots were around what we consider the medium range of now. And i never had an issue with any of them. (The first one i considered untransformable on its own was sixshot, and thats because i couldn't remember what any of his modes looked like) I couldnt have transformed sideburn, or rotf prime, but just because kids cant tackle those, doesnt mean you have to regress to three step transformations. And flipchangers like rattrap and terrorsaur also prove that you can have even one step transformations without sacrificing the quality of the toy. And other toys can show that simple transformations dont have to feel like its dumbed down (rotf hubcap, most of the unicron trilogy, a lot of beast wars, most of g1/g2) So, either hasbro genuinely think kids are idiots, or its a lie to cover a downgrade. Those are pretty much the choices. Both are pretty bad. But to me, it seems the evidence supports it being a cover. To be clear, what i find upsetting if it is a lie, is the lie itself instead of being upfront about if they feel they need to cut costs to keep the line going and compete. The latter is understandable, even if the results are awful, and their approach being questionable at best. |
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 25, 2014 10:15:23 GMT
It may just be the case that the designers consider less steps to be easier. Who knows!
But then fewer solid parts and less paint apps don't make toys easier to transforrm!
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Feb 15, 2014 7:56:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Ayres on Feb 15, 2014 7:57:46 GMT
Good lord some of those one step changers look the most dreadful tat
|
|
kayevcee
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
The Weather Wizard
Posts: 5,527
|
Post by kayevcee on Feb 15, 2014 10:24:24 GMT
So... Hound is basically Bulkhead, Drift is a samurai with a human-esque face and Lockdown looks like he's had his face ripped off.
Toy Grimlock looks a lot more like himself than the on-screen version.
-Nick
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Feb 15, 2014 10:46:05 GMT
Those are VERY expensive for what they are!!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Feb 15, 2014 12:13:19 GMT
The pricepoints on those toys are insane. Retail death! What are they thinking? They can't charge ten bucks for one-step toys! 80 bucks for Grimlock! Get bent.
I see Grimlock continues the Movie tradition of slapping random name on a robot. Looks feck all like any previous Grimlock in robot mode.
Oh dear. These look like really pump (and far too expensive for what they are) kids toys. Really bad. Very Poundlandish.
Nowt wrong with simple Transformers. I prefer simple transformations to complex ones, but these...
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Feb 15, 2014 15:47:26 GMT
Oh dear, eliminating knees and elbow joints doesn't make them easier just cheaper. Okay I suppose not having to straighten arms and legs before transforming makes it easier, but come on thats not what anyone was complaining about when they said they were to complex.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toph on Feb 15, 2014 16:43:40 GMT
I'm more convinced than ever that the goal of this "simplifying" is to cut costs. Because at this point to try to convince us that straightening out an arm or leg before transforming makes it too challenging for your eight year old target audience is insulting your target audience.
You know, there didn't seem to be this issue during beast wars, beast machines, armada, energon, or cybertron, that transformers were "too hard" for kids.
Or hell, even classics and universe 2.0 (discluding U1 due to being repaints of older lines).
And as i noted earlier, Prime and BH is one of the simplest lines since G1.
I call bullshit on hasbro. You think they're too hard? I agree on plenty of cases movie toys can be too hard, and shouldn't be. But this is just insulting in all kinds of ways.
|
|
Dezzeh
Thunderjet
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,888
|
Post by Dezzeh on Feb 15, 2014 17:53:23 GMT
Yay, a line I don' want anything from, which means I can ignore it's existence and get back to buying some g1 and 3rd party stuff.
|
|
