STL
14th November 2008, 03:45 AM
The Soapbox V: What makes a good Transformer?
My apologies for the months of absence. In recent times, I’ve been inundated by a lot of personal, academic (no, honestly) and professional commitments, not to mention the fact that I’ve been swept astray by the wave that is Lego. But hopefully I can maintain a more regular schedule. Exams loom as does the spring carnival. Anyway, without much further ado, let’s turn to the question of this column’s preponderance…
What makes a good Transformer?
That’s the eternal question, isn’t it? You toil away for your hard earned and after the requisite necessities and other deductions, you take that bit of discretionary expenditure and heap it all away on this figure you’ve been waiting for what seems like an eternity to get. And then you have to ask yourself: was it worth it?
At first instance, this is a topic matter seems rather elementary. Each collector should be able to make the determination as to whether or not a toy is good by their standards. However, if one peruses the countless boards devoted to TFs, one would find that the level of commentary frequently is dislocated with little real justification as to why a toy is good or, for lack of a better word, crap. The whole validation of a Transformer seems entirely intuitive at times. Perhaps it is a case of the fact that a figure speaks for itself but what this column attempts to do is dig deeper. It aims to provide some solid set of criteria as to what makes a good figure.
A. Price
As simple as this seems, I believe that this is a key determinative factor that affects the minds of many yet there isn’t always that express acknowledgement of it when comes to rating a figure. Golden Phoenix made mention of something he termed “buyer’s remorse” when referring to the fact that invariably many of those who purchase figures at a premium to review them before they are even released tend to rate the toys too positively so as to compensate for the fact they forked out more for it. I’m inclined to extend this a bit further. I’m sure you’ll agree that at some subconscious level that any figure we buy we rate with reference to what we paid for it. If we paid an Ultra price, we certainly didn’t want to get a legend. Case in point, Classics 2.0/Universe Silverbolt.
Price, in my mind, is negatively correlated with enjoyment. Generally speaking of course. The more you pay for something, the more you expect out of it. So price to some extent defines your expectations. And if it fails to meet those expectations, you’ll find yourself condemning the toy for its inadequacies. While this may seem self-evident, the point I hope to make is that too often the issue of price is buried under the myriad complaints that collectors have. Its invisible hand operates to affect the judgment of a collector w/out ever really being obvious.
The present exception is collectors who take pride in rare and pricey toys, the ones that you’d associate with selling an arm and a leg for. Or alternatively, what I call the “novelty” factor. This segment though is a relative small part of the collecting community and I’d be going too far to say that all of us are immune to this exception. There is a degree of satisfaction we draw at times from possessing something pricey that others do not have. That may not be a primary reason for our enjoyment of the said Transformer but they undeniably do play a part.
B. Nostalgia
I think this speaks for itself. For the faithful, whether indoctrinated into Transformers via G1 or Beast Wars, nostalgic elements always warm a collector’s heart and rekindles that youthful spirit.
C. Character Appeal
Again, fairly obvious. There’s nothing that beats a fan favourite. Done right, they become the absolute must-have of a collection. Done poorly, they are still whipped up just because of who they are.
D. Gimmicks/Weapons
Gimmicks: Electronic or otherwise. They aren’t necessarily greeted fondly by the fanbase. This is in large part due to the fact that there is a common view among the fandom that they detract from the quality of a Transformer. Recently, many of the Movie gimmicks were horrible. Some of the Animated gimmicks just don’t work IE. Bumblebee. Some of the Animated gimmicks are so easily stuffed up. Voyager Prime. Some though like Animated Grimlock’s sword are very clever. It’s not very often but I’d say that generally to the collector they represent a negative.
Weapons are either annoying or not. Some love the abundance of them. Some hate them with a vengeance because of lack of stowability or just how ridiculous they appear. Then there are the odd ones that are just striking because of their uniqueness. There is a proviso though. Stowability surprisingly sometimes cures the dislike of a weapon where it forms a feature of the alt mode or is actually part of the robot.
E. Scale
This one is always a certainty to ruffle the feathers of the collector base. And it works on two fronts. When we talk about scale, do we mean the scale of the vehicles relative to each other? Or do we mean the scale of their robot modes? Or a combination of both? It’s not an easy issue. In some instances, robot mode scale is the only relevant factor whereas in others both might be.
Take for instance, the G1 minibots. It’s no secret that Powerglide and Cosmos are woefully undersized for their scale alt modes yet I think there’s a predilection to having them all in a small class size because of nostalgia. But should an A-10 jet not logically have a larger robot mode and alt mode than the G1 cars, Optimus included? Why then is there this predilection to having all the minibots in the legends class/scout class in the Classics 2.0/Universe? So, yes, the matter of scale is not exactly an easy one to navigate as one first would imagine. Yet too often do we see it bandied around with little contextual discussion.
Certain segments will bemoan the inadequacy of a Transformer’s size. Others will bluntly, and sometimes impolitely, point out that this issue has been prevalent since G1. There’s a number of interesting reasons for this but I won’t endeavour to explore them here though I do hope to explore the matter in a later Soapbox. Scale a very divisive criteria and it’s good to know which side you’re on. Not because you need to take a side on the issue but because knowing where scale sits relative to other criteria helps you to understand what you look for in a Transformer.
F. Transformation
There to me are two dimensions to this. The first is the degree of complexity.
Complexity in my mind refers to the process of the transformation. Complexity though does not mean just mean make the transformation so damn hard that no one can figure it out. I’m thinking of the BT-10/Alternator Grimlock here. The toy just does not make intuitive sense. The transformation of the chest is very complex but it is not enjoyable b/c there is no coherent logic to it. Even once you have figured it out, it’s not an air of satisfaction that you breath, it’s sigh of relief. And that in my mind is a poor transformation. A good transformation can be complex but it must be intuitive. It must leave you feeling like you should have seen that groove you overlooked or that clip you missed three steps into the transformation. The issue of complexity though can be very divisive in itself. There are different tolerances among the fan base as to what level of complexity is sufficient before they are driven to frustration and knowing this is an important part for any collector because it helps guide you in know what you’re looking for in a Transformer which will ultimately allow you to better assess your enjoyment of a figure.
The second, and not so significant limb, is originality. Sometimes when you find a new process or transformation, such as most recently Classics 2.0/Universe Ironhide, There are a lot of original movements and folds that just astound you and it is that kind of magical discovery that brings that little bit of glee to your merry heart. In my mind, that is what makes that first transformation of a new Transformer such an important experience and almost sacrosanct. It is your single opportunity to potentially experience something new and be fascinated by it. Not all may feel that way though, especially those who inspect instructions first or watch video reviews first. That’s not to say that they do not enjoy the new leap in engineering but they just do not see the discovery of originality as important.
G. Realism
This aspect of the fanbase is largely centred around TFM, BT/Alternator and upcoming Alternity lines. It is a fairly broad category as the degree to which each fan is willing to suspend their sense of reality is vastly different. In my experiences, before I had returned to collecting and I happened to come across two blokes chatting giddily about Alternator Meister. On reflection, they were not conventional collectors. What primarily motivated them was the realistic nature of the toy. The fact that it looked like a real car, the RX-8, that made the Transformer so cool in their eyes. These were strong pure realists. Their collecting in large part had to do with the fact that modern engineering can take a real object and translate it into a robot action figure. And there’s no denying how cool that is. At the other end of the spectrum we’d have things like Animated which really just do not cut it for some people because they don’t come even close to emulating something that is real.
H. Articulation
The core of Transformers is that they are objects that transform into sentient robots. Their ability to retain articulation fitting of a robot go a long way to one’s enjoyment. It means you are essentially getting two toys for the price of one. That said, articulation often involves a trade off that not all fans feel comfortable with. Sometimes articulation may compromise the durability or transformation of a toy. And to understand where you stand on that trade off it’s good to know where articulation sits relative to the other criteria.
I. Durability
There’s a certain utility to having a toy that is not flimsy. Not having parts that are loose or springy. How important is this? I’m not really sure but that’s really up to you. Some do not like TFM Ironhide b/c his shoulders/chest are so springy. Others, myself included, find it an amazing and unique little aesthetic. Again, it’s a matter of where you sit on the spectrum but knowing where you sit helps you to appreciate what you’re looking for. Are you looking for solidity all over? Around key joints such as arms and legs? Is it okay for decorative, body kibble like wings and shields? Or does it not matter to you at all?
J. Paint Applications
In recent times, this has become a rather significant issue. Historically, however, paint applications have not been as large a concern. The Unicron Trilogy did not really offer much complaint but since the Movie there has been a raucous undercurrent of discontent with the quality of paint applications. Some may argue that this is only an issue because it was accentuated by the fact Henkei’s offerings are so much more attractive. However, during the Unicron Trilogy, the difference in paint applications between Takara and Hasbro were not so stark. As an owner of many of the Takara and Hasbro versions of Cybertron/Galaxy Force and Energon/Superlink, it generally came down to a matter of preference – not superiority. This is no longer the case. What we find with both Classics 2.0/Universe and Animated, and before that TFM, is a distinct lack of attention to the quality of paint applications. Mismatches in colours are so stark that they go a long way to diminishing one’s utility of a toy. A discussion of why this is happening is beyond the scope of this Soapbox but it is worthy of note that it is increasingly becoming an issue of not just preference but, worryingly, quality which will unmistakably impact on how much that certain Transformer takes your fancy.
As you can see, the list of criteria isn’t a short list. Hence that is perhaps why it’s all a rather intuitive process which most collectors go through in judging a toy. What this instalment of the Soapbox has hopefully done though is encourage a more conscious appreciation of those factors.
Certainly whilst the above criteria go some way to assessing the quality of a Transformer, it would be remiss to claim there is some system of universality. Of course there may be unanimity at times about the judgement of a toy but more often then not there are different segments of collectors who place differing weights on the above criteria and hence reach different conclusions. That is why Transformer toys are often received differently and that in itself is what makes collecting them such a delight. It doesn't hurt though to improve our appreciation about which of those factors influence our preferences now, does it?
My apologies for the months of absence. In recent times, I’ve been inundated by a lot of personal, academic (no, honestly) and professional commitments, not to mention the fact that I’ve been swept astray by the wave that is Lego. But hopefully I can maintain a more regular schedule. Exams loom as does the spring carnival. Anyway, without much further ado, let’s turn to the question of this column’s preponderance…
What makes a good Transformer?
That’s the eternal question, isn’t it? You toil away for your hard earned and after the requisite necessities and other deductions, you take that bit of discretionary expenditure and heap it all away on this figure you’ve been waiting for what seems like an eternity to get. And then you have to ask yourself: was it worth it?
At first instance, this is a topic matter seems rather elementary. Each collector should be able to make the determination as to whether or not a toy is good by their standards. However, if one peruses the countless boards devoted to TFs, one would find that the level of commentary frequently is dislocated with little real justification as to why a toy is good or, for lack of a better word, crap. The whole validation of a Transformer seems entirely intuitive at times. Perhaps it is a case of the fact that a figure speaks for itself but what this column attempts to do is dig deeper. It aims to provide some solid set of criteria as to what makes a good figure.
A. Price
As simple as this seems, I believe that this is a key determinative factor that affects the minds of many yet there isn’t always that express acknowledgement of it when comes to rating a figure. Golden Phoenix made mention of something he termed “buyer’s remorse” when referring to the fact that invariably many of those who purchase figures at a premium to review them before they are even released tend to rate the toys too positively so as to compensate for the fact they forked out more for it. I’m inclined to extend this a bit further. I’m sure you’ll agree that at some subconscious level that any figure we buy we rate with reference to what we paid for it. If we paid an Ultra price, we certainly didn’t want to get a legend. Case in point, Classics 2.0/Universe Silverbolt.
Price, in my mind, is negatively correlated with enjoyment. Generally speaking of course. The more you pay for something, the more you expect out of it. So price to some extent defines your expectations. And if it fails to meet those expectations, you’ll find yourself condemning the toy for its inadequacies. While this may seem self-evident, the point I hope to make is that too often the issue of price is buried under the myriad complaints that collectors have. Its invisible hand operates to affect the judgment of a collector w/out ever really being obvious.
The present exception is collectors who take pride in rare and pricey toys, the ones that you’d associate with selling an arm and a leg for. Or alternatively, what I call the “novelty” factor. This segment though is a relative small part of the collecting community and I’d be going too far to say that all of us are immune to this exception. There is a degree of satisfaction we draw at times from possessing something pricey that others do not have. That may not be a primary reason for our enjoyment of the said Transformer but they undeniably do play a part.
B. Nostalgia
I think this speaks for itself. For the faithful, whether indoctrinated into Transformers via G1 or Beast Wars, nostalgic elements always warm a collector’s heart and rekindles that youthful spirit.
C. Character Appeal
Again, fairly obvious. There’s nothing that beats a fan favourite. Done right, they become the absolute must-have of a collection. Done poorly, they are still whipped up just because of who they are.
D. Gimmicks/Weapons
Gimmicks: Electronic or otherwise. They aren’t necessarily greeted fondly by the fanbase. This is in large part due to the fact that there is a common view among the fandom that they detract from the quality of a Transformer. Recently, many of the Movie gimmicks were horrible. Some of the Animated gimmicks just don’t work IE. Bumblebee. Some of the Animated gimmicks are so easily stuffed up. Voyager Prime. Some though like Animated Grimlock’s sword are very clever. It’s not very often but I’d say that generally to the collector they represent a negative.
Weapons are either annoying or not. Some love the abundance of them. Some hate them with a vengeance because of lack of stowability or just how ridiculous they appear. Then there are the odd ones that are just striking because of their uniqueness. There is a proviso though. Stowability surprisingly sometimes cures the dislike of a weapon where it forms a feature of the alt mode or is actually part of the robot.
E. Scale
This one is always a certainty to ruffle the feathers of the collector base. And it works on two fronts. When we talk about scale, do we mean the scale of the vehicles relative to each other? Or do we mean the scale of their robot modes? Or a combination of both? It’s not an easy issue. In some instances, robot mode scale is the only relevant factor whereas in others both might be.
Take for instance, the G1 minibots. It’s no secret that Powerglide and Cosmos are woefully undersized for their scale alt modes yet I think there’s a predilection to having them all in a small class size because of nostalgia. But should an A-10 jet not logically have a larger robot mode and alt mode than the G1 cars, Optimus included? Why then is there this predilection to having all the minibots in the legends class/scout class in the Classics 2.0/Universe? So, yes, the matter of scale is not exactly an easy one to navigate as one first would imagine. Yet too often do we see it bandied around with little contextual discussion.
Certain segments will bemoan the inadequacy of a Transformer’s size. Others will bluntly, and sometimes impolitely, point out that this issue has been prevalent since G1. There’s a number of interesting reasons for this but I won’t endeavour to explore them here though I do hope to explore the matter in a later Soapbox. Scale a very divisive criteria and it’s good to know which side you’re on. Not because you need to take a side on the issue but because knowing where scale sits relative to other criteria helps you to understand what you look for in a Transformer.
F. Transformation
There to me are two dimensions to this. The first is the degree of complexity.
Complexity in my mind refers to the process of the transformation. Complexity though does not mean just mean make the transformation so damn hard that no one can figure it out. I’m thinking of the BT-10/Alternator Grimlock here. The toy just does not make intuitive sense. The transformation of the chest is very complex but it is not enjoyable b/c there is no coherent logic to it. Even once you have figured it out, it’s not an air of satisfaction that you breath, it’s sigh of relief. And that in my mind is a poor transformation. A good transformation can be complex but it must be intuitive. It must leave you feeling like you should have seen that groove you overlooked or that clip you missed three steps into the transformation. The issue of complexity though can be very divisive in itself. There are different tolerances among the fan base as to what level of complexity is sufficient before they are driven to frustration and knowing this is an important part for any collector because it helps guide you in know what you’re looking for in a Transformer which will ultimately allow you to better assess your enjoyment of a figure.
The second, and not so significant limb, is originality. Sometimes when you find a new process or transformation, such as most recently Classics 2.0/Universe Ironhide, There are a lot of original movements and folds that just astound you and it is that kind of magical discovery that brings that little bit of glee to your merry heart. In my mind, that is what makes that first transformation of a new Transformer such an important experience and almost sacrosanct. It is your single opportunity to potentially experience something new and be fascinated by it. Not all may feel that way though, especially those who inspect instructions first or watch video reviews first. That’s not to say that they do not enjoy the new leap in engineering but they just do not see the discovery of originality as important.
G. Realism
This aspect of the fanbase is largely centred around TFM, BT/Alternator and upcoming Alternity lines. It is a fairly broad category as the degree to which each fan is willing to suspend their sense of reality is vastly different. In my experiences, before I had returned to collecting and I happened to come across two blokes chatting giddily about Alternator Meister. On reflection, they were not conventional collectors. What primarily motivated them was the realistic nature of the toy. The fact that it looked like a real car, the RX-8, that made the Transformer so cool in their eyes. These were strong pure realists. Their collecting in large part had to do with the fact that modern engineering can take a real object and translate it into a robot action figure. And there’s no denying how cool that is. At the other end of the spectrum we’d have things like Animated which really just do not cut it for some people because they don’t come even close to emulating something that is real.
H. Articulation
The core of Transformers is that they are objects that transform into sentient robots. Their ability to retain articulation fitting of a robot go a long way to one’s enjoyment. It means you are essentially getting two toys for the price of one. That said, articulation often involves a trade off that not all fans feel comfortable with. Sometimes articulation may compromise the durability or transformation of a toy. And to understand where you stand on that trade off it’s good to know where articulation sits relative to the other criteria.
I. Durability
There’s a certain utility to having a toy that is not flimsy. Not having parts that are loose or springy. How important is this? I’m not really sure but that’s really up to you. Some do not like TFM Ironhide b/c his shoulders/chest are so springy. Others, myself included, find it an amazing and unique little aesthetic. Again, it’s a matter of where you sit on the spectrum but knowing where you sit helps you to appreciate what you’re looking for. Are you looking for solidity all over? Around key joints such as arms and legs? Is it okay for decorative, body kibble like wings and shields? Or does it not matter to you at all?
J. Paint Applications
In recent times, this has become a rather significant issue. Historically, however, paint applications have not been as large a concern. The Unicron Trilogy did not really offer much complaint but since the Movie there has been a raucous undercurrent of discontent with the quality of paint applications. Some may argue that this is only an issue because it was accentuated by the fact Henkei’s offerings are so much more attractive. However, during the Unicron Trilogy, the difference in paint applications between Takara and Hasbro were not so stark. As an owner of many of the Takara and Hasbro versions of Cybertron/Galaxy Force and Energon/Superlink, it generally came down to a matter of preference – not superiority. This is no longer the case. What we find with both Classics 2.0/Universe and Animated, and before that TFM, is a distinct lack of attention to the quality of paint applications. Mismatches in colours are so stark that they go a long way to diminishing one’s utility of a toy. A discussion of why this is happening is beyond the scope of this Soapbox but it is worthy of note that it is increasingly becoming an issue of not just preference but, worryingly, quality which will unmistakably impact on how much that certain Transformer takes your fancy.
As you can see, the list of criteria isn’t a short list. Hence that is perhaps why it’s all a rather intuitive process which most collectors go through in judging a toy. What this instalment of the Soapbox has hopefully done though is encourage a more conscious appreciation of those factors.
Certainly whilst the above criteria go some way to assessing the quality of a Transformer, it would be remiss to claim there is some system of universality. Of course there may be unanimity at times about the judgement of a toy but more often then not there are different segments of collectors who place differing weights on the above criteria and hence reach different conclusions. That is why Transformer toys are often received differently and that in itself is what makes collecting them such a delight. It doesn't hurt though to improve our appreciation about which of those factors influence our preferences now, does it?