Transformers 1984-1993

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 14, 2015 19:28:20 GMT Toph said:

I'll take toy G1, Marvel G1, or even Sunbow G1 over IDW G1.
Cannot stand what Roberts did to Magnus.

And no, we've never gotten a full G1 update. We've gotten two halfassed versions.
Classics which is just the optimus repaint, and MP which screwed that part up by only going armor mode.
And yes, IDW is G1.

To be pedantic there never was a Generation One until the 2000's. No toy was packaged as G1. It was Transformers. And for what it's worth while I like the UM original toy. Never did I feel he had a white Prime cab robot in any of his fictional representations.

MP Magnus went in line with the animation model which is not a screw up. A choice and one that not everyone likes but hardly a screw up.

Now the bum flap on him well I could be persuaded to say it was a screw up without much arm-twisting.

Andy

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 14, 2015 21:32:36 GMT Toph said:

Generation 1 was unofficially acknowledged by everyone to be G2 as soon as hasbro marketed G2. It was common sense then as an easy way to distinguish the original line from G2 and Beast Wars, and became even more common sense once they started creating new universes. It's just illogical to deny this fact. And even so, it IS OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED AS G1 now, by all sources.
G1 Ultra Magnus is G1 Ultra Magnus across the board. All toys representing the character from that particular set of continuities, INCLUDING IDW, is G1 Ultra Magnus.
And this concept is so strong that other franchises such as MLP and Pokemon have embraced it in their own communities.

Really, unofficially acknowledged by everyone? Did you check that with everyone to make sure, because I can certainly say I never called it G1, it was always just Transformers to me.

Whether it is used now does not change the fact that NONE of them were called Generation 1 or G1. I am not denying the term exists merely pointing out it's retroactive rebranding.

Also as we can quite clearly see there is no 1 single representation as so many characters have drastically different incarnations across the cartoon, and the comics and the toys.

Also you may see IDW as G1, I see IDW as IDW.

Opinions are just that opinions, not facts so try not to present them in such a way (and yes I know I am guilty of that, usually when talking about Mike Costa or Shane McCarthy's work) as that way lies the madness of other less enlightened message boards.

Andy

[Philip Ayres]

Then there's the madness about what the Americans call the 92/3 Euro toys.....

[Andy Turnbull]

Indeed. Now that's a whole sitdown lecture with people.

Andy

[Toph]

You are the only person I've ever encountered who denies G1 as G1, and the only people I've ever met who deny IDW as a G1 continuity exist on this board.
It's not an opinion. the IDW continuity is a G1 continuity. It is acknowledged as such, pretty much by everyone. Even hasbro.

[Philip Ayres]

Feb 14, 2015 21:50:14 GMT Andy Turnbull said:

Indeed. Now that's a whole sitdown lecture with people.

Andy

With cricket bats.

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 14, 2015 21:51:07 GMT Toph said:

You are the only person I've ever encountered who denies G1 as G1, and the only people I've ever met who deny IDW as a G1 continuity exist on this board.
It's not an opinion. the IDW continuity is a G1 continuity. It is acknowledged as such, pretty much by everyone. Even hasbro.

I've encountered several myself.

IDW is it's own continuity because there is no one single continuity of Transformers.

Folks can call it G1, it doesn't put me neither up nor down but I have not seen aside from a few Dreamwave comics seen anything on the shelves that said Transformers G1 or Transformers Generation One.

It's a short hand term to classify the pre G2 era, which is fine in exactly the same way that Star Trek is often referred to as The Original Series now with the advent of TNG et. al, but it doesn't stop the fact that it is just Star Trek.

Now, stop trying to pick a fight.

Andy

[Pinwig]

IDW may be *a* G1 continuity, but it's not *the* G1 continuity. The definite article you might say.

I suppose it's like Marvel and DC with their hundreds of different earths.

There we are, a peacemaking 1500th post.

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 14, 2015 21:51:15 GMT Philip Ayres said:

Feb 14, 2015 21:50:14 GMT Andy Turnbull said:

Indeed. Now that's a whole sitdown lecture with people.

Andy

With cricket bats.

Now now, we can't beat knowledge into them Phil. Violence is not the answer. We just make them watch the back half of Sunbow S2 on a loop.

Much less cleaning up to do.

Andy

[Philip Ayres]

Yes but anyone who calls it G1.5 is asking for a smacking IMO!

It prepurposes both that the original Transformers line is called G1 AND that it finished in 1990 with the year 1 Action Masters.

There again you see a lot of people on certain other forums arguing that Star Saber isn't "G1"!

Really G2 has a lot to answer for by applying a label to the whole Transformers line which you could argue it didn't need.

[Rich]

It may be retrospective, but I do now think of the original series as g1. But I also think of idw as being idw. It's close to g1 but increasingly becoming distant and its own thing - a sort of combat pocket on the trouser leg of time.

[Andy Turnbull]

It's a term people are comfortable with and it's cool I have no problem with it being used, it's not for me I generally just call it TF, Marvel or Sunbow when referring to the pre G2 era.

[Kingoji]

Uuuuh... *raises hand* Never called anything G1 until Dreamwave came along, here.
And IDW isn't G1, it just lifts most of it's characters from there, even abandoning the core G1 mythology for the longest time. They even stated in the Infiltration #0 essay by Ryall, and Furman's fore word to the trade, and practically anywhere they COULD publicly say it at the time, that this was no more Generation One than Marvel's Ultimate line WAS the 616.

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 14, 2015 22:07:39 GMT Philip Ayres said:

Yes but anyone who calls it G1.5 is asking for a smacking IMO!

It prepurposes both that the original Transformers line is called G1 AND that it finished in 1990 with the year 1 Action Masters.

There again you see a lot of people on certain other forums arguing that Star Saber isn't "G1"!

Really G2 has a lot to answer for by applying a label to the whole Transformers line which you could argue it didn't need.

I am pretty sure young Nick wrote an article for a TMUK fanzine entitled G1.5, I am not sure which one though. Surely you can't be advocating violence against Nick?

I can see the wisdom in a rebranding for the US market where there hadn't been that presence, but for the UK and other markets where the line had never been off the shelves it does seem odd.

Andy

[Toph]

Feb 14, 2015 21:56:32 GMT Andy Turnbull said:

Feb 14, 2015 21:51:07 GMT Toph said:

You are the only person I've ever encountered who denies G1 as G1, and the only people I've ever met who deny IDW as a G1 continuity exist on this board.
It's not an opinion. the IDW continuity is a G1 continuity. It is acknowledged as such, pretty much by everyone. Even hasbro.

I've encountered several myself.

IDW is it's own continuity because there is no one single continuity of Transformers.

Folks can call it G1, it doesn't put me neither up nor down but I have not seen aside from a few Dreamwave comics seen anything on the shelves that said Transformers G1 or Transformers Generation One.

It's a short hand term to classify the pre G2 era, which is fine in exactly the same way that Star Trek is often referred to as The Original Series now with the advent of TNG et. al, but it doesn't stop the fact that it is just Star Trek.

Now, stop trying to pick a fight.

Andy

Dude, stop. I'm not "picking a fight," and I don't appreciate you accusing me of such. You are the one who took up with me with something I said by referring to this UM as a G1 version of the character (as opposed to true RiD or Animated).

[Bogatan]

The original transformers or g1fiction is defined as sleeping in a volcano for a long time to me. Marvel us, uk, sunbow, ladybird and some others I think used that as a basis.

So based on that IDW has never been G1 to me. At least not proper g1. Characterisation is g1 inspired, but thats not the same.

[Toph]

What defines a set of continuities for me, is the set of characters used for it.
An issue is, no one (By that, I mean people who contribute major fiction like comics or shows) treats anything else the way they do G1.
No one returns to the various wells the way they do G1. We don't have multiple Animated continuities as everyone tried to work within the core cartoon, and add to that continuity rather than create a new one to avoid conflicts.

So for me, I define eras by the characters used in the stories, not necessarily the events. It's hard to deny that Sunbow, Marvel, Dreamwave, and IDW are all meant to be representations of the same character, In the same way that William Shatner and Chris Pine are different representations of the same character.
Meanwhile, though influenced by him, UT, and Movie Optimus Prime are not representations of the same character.

As for events, Beast Wars Uprising is a drastically different take on Beast Wars, as is the microcontinuity from the first wave of toys that originally set BW up as a continuation of G1/G2. As is the japanese continuity. But all four are equally and distinctly Beast Wars continuities. I never see anyone try to argue otherwise.

UT has two to four distinct continuities. Anime (Can count for two if you wanna push it), Dreamwave, and toy fiction, which hasbro built up a lot around Cybertron.

Also: tfwiki.net/wiki/IDW_Generation_1_continuity

[Andy Turnbull]

Sunbow and Marvel are far too distinct and are at times radically different interpretations of the characters so I don't see them as the same. Continuity is for me not the characters but the stories, so I can easily see everything as alternates. (Can you tell I really liked Marvel's What If?) If it wasn't for Marvel UK muddying the waters by bringing the Movie into it's storylines, there would be little connection save for the appearances and names to the characters. It's a stretch to argue that the likes of Blaster, Shockwave, Soundwave and even Optimus Prime are the same character in these two distinct universes.

Galvatron is about the only character that is similar, and that's because he ends up mad in both realities!

[Kingoji]

"So, you guys are supposed to be US... but from other worlds. I don't see it." ~ Michelangelo 'Prime', Turtles Forever.

[kayevcee]

This thread should be called "1984-1993", surely?

In my defense, uncle Phil, my "Gee One (point five)" article was named as such because it's a handy collective term for the European exclusive period. It was good fun, though I can't remember a huge amount about it now. I remember noting that the Turbomasters and Predators were the first instances of light piping and properly integrated weapons (well, the Turbomasters anyway). Now most larger figures have integrated weapons in vehicle mode and pretty much everybody has light piping. It's nice to know we contributed something to the line.

-Nick

[legios]

Feb 14, 2015 22:10:27 GMT Kingoji said:

Uuuuh... *raises hand* Never called anything G1 until Dreamwave came along, here.

The only things I think of as "Generation One" are the Dreamwave Comics Series (because it says so in the title) and the Sunbow Cartoon (because when I first encountered online Transformers fandom in 1990, "G1" or "Generation One" was used specifically to refer to the Sunbow Cartoon series prior to the Cybernet Spacecube reedit and sometimes the Japanese Sequel shows. The Marvel comic was just referred to as "the comic" - and rarely mentioned by anyone other than Dave Van Domolen or Jovanka Kink.).

I don't find its more modern useage to have much usefulness. When you hear folk using the term to suggest that the Sunbow cartoon, Marvel Comic, japanese shows and the IDW comics are somehow "the same thing" despite the differences between them (noteably having characters who share names and appearances but are actually completely different characters - IDW/Marvel/Sunbow Ultra Magnus is a good example of that) I really don't see it as a particularly useful term. I'm not bothered about people using the term, and using it to mean whatever they want - but I see no reason to use it myself when I can be specific about what I am referring to.

It doesn't really cause me any issues - everyone here always seems to know what I mean, and as here or with folk from here is pretty much the only time I'm going to be discussing Transformers I don't generally give it this much thought. I think my own category distinctions pretty much divide along media lines - Liveaction/Comic/bookncassette/animation and after that I take everything on its own terms.

(The term G1.5 for the late "The Transformers" toys is different. That is simply inaccurate, predicated as it is on the incorrect belief that the Transformers toyline came to an end prior to its rebranding as "Transformers Generation 2". Distribution may have ceased in the US, but the line was still going on in Europe and Asia all the way up to the rebranding. )

Karl

EDIT -This was written over the course of half an hour - I am a slow typist on a touch-screen - so it may be that some of what I've said I have been beaten to the draw on. I apologise for any duplication and resulting boredom. Also, none of this should be read as anything other than my own musings as to how I organise Transformers in my head - I'm certainly not in the business of telling anyone else how they should relate to it. Especially as pretty much everyone here is much more "inside" the fandom than I am these days. :-)

[Toph]

I agree on the "G1.5" issue. It's G1 straight up. Because the terms didn't exist until until Generation 2 existed. If it doesn't say G2, then it's G1. The only grey area are the specific toys that were reused/reissued as the same thing in G2, like Pyro. And one could easily validate that they aren't G2.

[Fortmax2020]

IDW is a totally new continuity to either The Transformers Marvel comic series or original Sunbow cartoon. Characters appear in all three continuities that share appearances and traits, but are certainly not the same character. Think of Ultra Magnus for example:

Marvel Comic - self-doubting Autobot Resistance Superweapon.
Sunbow Cartoon - Confident Autobot second in command.
IDW - Serious duly appointed enforcer of the Tyrest Accord. Never smiles.

[Pinwig]

Feb 15, 2015 0:16:41 GMT Fortmax2020 said:

Marvel Comic - self-doubting Autobot Resistance Superweapon.

And that's why we love him.

[Shockprowl]

Word.

[primenova]

If Generation 2 wasn't marked under the G2 banner - would we call the 84-91 line G1. Applies to both comic & toys

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 15, 2015 9:28:19 GMT primenova said:

If Generation 2 wasn't marked under the G2 banner - would we call the 84-91 line G1. Applies to both comic & toys

No. It would just be Transformers.

Andy

[Pinwig]

I'm sure it would have something. Doctor who is now called several different things to differentiate the two shows, and we've already said star trek is labeled TOS. As soon as there's two of something they gain labels to divide them, if it was just 'Transformers' no one would know which type you were talking about.

Whether official or not a label would exist.

[Kingoji]

I guess by now we would be saying something to shorthand/differentiate, like 'Original Transformers' or 'OTFs'. Which is actually a good way to illustrate my opinion on the use of G1. If we were calling it something like 'Original' then we'd in no way be branding the likes of the IDW material under that umbrella, and there'd be no reasonable arguement to. I look at G1 the same way, with the further reasoning that 'Generation One' is again a seperate, later branch of one comic run only. Otherwise everything ever branded Robots In Disguise would all have to be considered the same things as well.
I look at Beast Wars the same way I look at 'G1' toys/toon/comics; multiple takes on the same core ideas that are equally valid if not all my preference, and because they were all happening at the same time there's no question that they were different branches of the same tree.
IDW is it's own tree, it's roots just got tangled in the 30 year old thicket called Transformers.

What the fuck am I talking about?

[Andy Turnbull]

Feb 15, 2015 10:03:45 GMT Pinwig said:

I'm sure it would have something. Doctor who is now called several different things to differentiate the two shows, and we've already said star trek is labeled TOS. As soon as there's two of something they gain labels to divide them, if it was just 'Transformers' no one would know which type you were talking about.

Whether official or not a label would exist.

Oh yes the label exists, but my point was quite clear in that at no point have I been able to go and buy a Transformer toy that is labelled as Transformers: Generation 1.

Folks call it G1 and I do as well at times, because it is an aid to folks understanding what you are on about, but there was not a Transformers Generation 1. There was Transformers and then there was Transformers Generation 2 that was my point.

Andy