What do you consider to be the WORST G1 Toy Concept?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tinyJazz

Great topic BTT!

---

Seconded!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tinyJazz

1 Headmasters
Who thought this was a good idea? Brainstorm? Are you kidding me?
It's the main reason why I couldn't take season 4 seriously. You know, aside from the fact that it sounds like they all went off to teach in the UK.
I don't see how this concept makes logical sense in fiction either, especially with organics forming the head. What happens when they die? How is a headless robot supposed to fight?
This particularly bugged me when IDW took Sunstreaker's head off. I'd just gotten into reading the comics and one of my favourite Autobots was ruined for the foreseeable future. I'm just thankful they fixed him.

---

BLASPHEMY!

OK I'll admit the English version of the Headmasters story is fairly pointless. Who thought that chopping off the head of a bot would be a good idea? But the Japanese take on the idea (Of little guys being Transformers and joining to a bigger body) makes much better sense.

I'd go with Action Masters, then Pretenders (although I do like them, it's mainly because they are bad...)

Finally Monster Bots. Once again, I will admit I like them (Yay for Blot! Terrorcons are my favourite combiney group) but they certainly ruin the robots in disguise idea. I mean take the Seacons for example. Sure, they blend in juuuust fine don't they...:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tinyJazz

Great topic BTT! :)

1 Headmasters
Who thought this was a good idea? Brainstorm? Are you kidding me?
It's the main reason why I couldn't take season 4 seriously. You know, aside from the fact that it sounds like they all went off to teach in the UK.
I don't see how this concept makes logical sense in fiction either, especially with organics forming the head. What happens when they die? How is a headless robot supposed to fight?

---

I gotta admit, if I had said name your 4 worst TF Toy Concepts, Headmasters would have been my next one. I only have 4 (Skullcruncher, Highbrow, Scorponok & Fort Max) or 7 if you count the likes of The Motorvators (awful name - they sound like a self-help seminar group and they were more of "Facemasters"). Also since when I display them I like to have every bot set up in Robot mode (with the exception of my Grimlock's) it bugged me I could not have both bots set up as it would not work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tetsuwan Convoy

OK I'll admit the English version of the Headmasters story is fairly pointless. Who thought that chopping off the head of a bot would be a good idea? But the Japanese take on the idea (Of little guys being Transformers and joining to a bigger body) makes much better sense.

---

I do have all the Japanese episodes on DVD, but I must admit I did have trouble following them and only watched them once - perhaps if I had a greater understanding of it all I may like Headmasters better. :)

But I will say this for headmasters - the vehicle modes of the likes of Hardhead and Brainstorm were awesome, and the character of Nightbeat is great - so I do still want them, just not for their headmaster gimmick ;)

Worst G1 Toy Concepts
1. Action Masters - Transformers that don't transform, and worse still they dominated the toy line when they came out. In 1988 if you didn't like Pretenders you could collect Powermasters or Triggerbots or Triggercons or Sparkabots or Seacons or the Double-Targetmasters or Headmasters etc. - there was more variety/choice. In 1990 if you didn't like Action Masters... well, there were Micromasters... and that was it. (needless to say I collected more Micromasters ;)) And G1 slipped into a serious decline after that... 3 years later G1 was dead. Action Masters weren't the only thing that led to the demise of G1, but they were the straw that broke the camel's back.
2. Action Master Elites - their so called 'transformations' are a complete joke (they make the 1988 Pretenders look like Masterpieces by comparison). Their ultra rarity makes would make them uber expensive on the secondary market, and I have nooo intention of paying high prices for these pieces of rubbish (they're colours are ugly too).
3. Firecons - their alt modes are Weird-Monster Things, but they are the worst because they have such chumpy robot modes, and they all have the same ridiculous transformation scheme and design which is just the robot carrying the monster on his back, turn around to transform. Reminds me of all the monsters in "Monkey" where they appear in human form and turn around to change into their true demon selves!

Would I still buy these toys to complete my G1 collection?
1: Only if I happen to come across them for a cheap price
2: As above. Odds of this happening is nigh impossible, so effectively "no." :p
3: Already completed (hey, they were cheap!)
...I'm certainly not going to actively hunt or pay expensive prices for any of these crummy toys!

----------------

I'd also like to jump into the defence of the 1989 Pretenders. They were far better toys than the 1988 Pretenders and I don't think they deserve to be painted with the same brush and judged as harshly. First of all, they were cheaper. Secondly, they had MUCH better looking alt modes; even the weaker 89 Pretenders (e.g. Grimlock and Jazz) were better toys than any of the 88 Pretenders. Yes, Grimlock is puny and Jazz has a gimpy robot mode, but Grimlock's alt mode looks like a robotic (baby) T-Rex, and Jazz's robot mode is solid and not stick-thin! The worst of the 89 Pretenders trump the best of the 88 ones! You look at the 1988 Pretenders' alt modes and think, "What the hell is THAT meant to be?!?" -- but not so with the 1989 Pretenders. You can _see_ the Bludgeon is a tank, Stranglehold is a rhinoceros, Bumblebee is a Volkswagen Beetle, Pincher is a scorpion et al. -- their alt modes are definitive, not ambiguous!

I'd like to cite the G2 Power Masters as one of the worst toy concepts too... I don't own any... the only one I regret not getting is Ironhide, purely because he's Ironhide. i.e. I want the character, still hate the toy! Gah... just awful! These things pegwarmed really badly too. I still remember seeing LOADS of them at Toys R Us in the late 1990s. Mind you, Laser Optimus Prime was a shelf warmer too, and that's an excellent toy. :o

1: Action Masters. Robot Replicas at least had the benefit of being fairly posable, but AMs were just bleurgh.
2: 'Cybertronian/futuristic' alt-modes. I can live with a few exceptions such as G1 Shockwave and Cyclonus, but so many of the toys just look lazy. G1 Blurr? OK, looks kinda cool if not especially 'in disguise'. G1 Quickswitch? Not so much - even allowing for the 'Six-Changer' thing.
3: Gold Plastic. Ooh, shiny! Ooh, breaky!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ode to a Grasshopper

.
2: 'Cybertronian/futuristic' alt-modes. I can live with a few exceptions such as G1 Shockwave and Cyclonus, but so many of the toys just look lazy. G1 Blurr? OK, looks kinda cool if not especially 'in disguise'. G1 Quickswitch? Not so much - even allowing for the 'Six-Changer' thing.!

---

The 'Cybertronian' modes were hit and miss for me. I liked the molds of Hardhead, Brainstorm, Triggerhappy, Misfire etc though I will admit they did not have the intricacy of other bots Transformations (Slugslinger a prime example - very lazy). And I loved the look of the Technobots. Was always happy to see Cybertronian forms, but as you say, there does seem to be a parallel in G1 between the complexity of the transform and the realism of the alt-mode, I think it was Hasbro getting lazy before they got REALLY lazy with Action Masters :rolleyes:

Action Masters! I'll never understand Transformers that don't transform! (I can't believe Hasbro still makes similar stuff! :rolleyes:) Pretenders, a very close second!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robzy

Action Masters! I'll never understand Transformers that don't transform! (I can't believe Hasbro still makes similar stuff! :rolleyes:) Pretenders, a very close second!

---

^ This!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robzy

(I can't believe Hasbro still makes similar stuff! :rolleyes:)

---

Yeah but, nowadays they're made as sideline figures, or pieces of merchandising. You look at Robot Replicas or Revoltech... they don't transform, but they don't dominate the main Transformers line like Action Masters did. In 1990-91, if you didn't collect Action Masters that took a serious chunk out of your collecting during those years. I don't collect Robot Replicas or Revoltech, but that hasn't exactly slowed down my collecting in recent years. :p

Imagine if Hasbro ONLY produced Robot Replicas and Cyberverse... and nothing else. That's pretty much what it was like. <shudder> Had the Action Masters just been some minor sub group (like the Firecons) or a sideline piece of merchandising... it wouldn't have been so bad. The crappy thing about Action Masters was just they really took over a massive chunk of the Transformers franchise!

1. Vote for your Worst G1 Toy Concept in the poll


Action Masters. Easy.
2. List your top 3 worst G1 Toy Concepts with a brief description why you feel this way.


Action Masters - Transformers. It's in the name for gods sake. Without that it's basically just a normal action figure shaped like something that has about 10000 times more play value and ingenuity.

Headmasters - for two reasons. First, I don't think that the engineering at the time allowed them to explore this concept properly (ie most of thes heads ended up looking like oversized bobble heads). Secondly, as a child I generally lost everything that wasn't physically permanently attached to the figure and the prospect of one day having a headless figure was a real downer.

Weird Monster Things - I'm not against the concept at all, just that execution was usually so lazy.

3. (Optional) Would you still buy these toys if you needed them to complete your G1 Collection?


Would I buy a figure from a subline I dislike, from a generation of figures that I dislike? Who does that? No, obviously.