(Admin edit - moved discussion from CYB Warrior Starscream toy review topic)
$30 Happy Meal toys without the meal.
Would it be an over-exaggeration to say this is the worst Transformer main line ever? Especially considering we're in 2018?
(Sorry if I'm being mean. The point is I would not even give this to a kid, let alone pay $30 for it. Like Gok said, there's Legion toys that are better than this)
Possibly.Quote:
Originally Posted by FatalityPitt
The other main contender would be Animorphs. Animorphs are worse in terms of just not even really being Transformers, but in terms of design and engineering I'd say that they are better than these Cyberverse toys... maaaaaybe. On one hand they do have fully articulated rob--, human modes that are unhindered by gimmicks (except for Cassie/Wolf and Rachel/Lion's human heads). But on the other hand, the Cyberverse toys don't rely on detachable accessories to form the alt modes. e.g. if you lose Marco/Gorilla's gorilla hands then you can't fully transform him to beast mode. The Cyberverse Warriors have no accessories at all, so there's literally nothing to lose. Yeah, Cyberverse Starscream's jet mode is awful, but he will always be able to transform into it. In this regard he's arguably better than the G1 Seekers because they're nothing more than "cigars" that rely heavily on detachable accessories. The secondary market is full of "cigar" Seekers missing their wings, horizontal stabilisers, vertical stabilisers, landing gear, fists etc.
But yeah, by 2018 standards this toy is inexcusably excremental.
Yeah, by today's standards, the G1 Seekers won't fly. The only things they have going for them these days are their historical significance and nostalgia value. They are the great granddaddies of all the Starscream and seeker transformers we have today.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
But in fairness, they were basically repacks of toys from another brand that existed pre-Transformers, and no one knew how transforming robots would fare commercially back in the early 1980's.
I'm not sure why the Cybervese line exists. They've made much better toys in the past, and might as well have gave us repacks of those. Also if they are suppose to be for young children/fans, then isn't that what RescueBots is for?
The Cyberverse line supports the new TV show and both the show and toys are aimed at a young (but not Rescue Bots young) audience. Just like the Robots In Disguise show and toy line it replaces were for the pst few years.Quote:
Originally Posted by FatalityPitt
But because Cyberverse is going full G1 I think some older fans assume it must be meant for them (in a way they didn’t think the same about RID). Seige/WFC and Studio Series is aimed at us.
http://i.imgur.com/D3zJIYK.jpg
Core "Boys" is so sexist. :rolleyes:
But I don't buy that defence. Most Transformers lines are aimed at kids, including G1. Many of us children of the 80s were in that "Core Kids" age range when we got into G1. G1 was "Ages 5 and Up." Yet the toys managed to both engage and expand our interest (or we wouldn't be here now). I know kids today in the Core Kids age range who are mad fans of the Generations line. I recently picked up a Titans Return Rewind figure to give to my daughter's friend because he's been looking everywhere for that toy but has been unable to find it. I've seen kids at my daughter's school playing with Generations figures.
As Michael McConnohie said, kids aren't stupid and they really hate it when adults treat them as idiots by presenting them with condescending material. McConnohie believes that this is why Transformers succeeded where many of its competitors failed. I'm inclined to agree with FatalityPitt... I really don't know which demographic they're targeting with these toys. They're above the level of toddler/pre-school age children (age 4-), but below the level of school age children (age 5+).
Pic: Me when I was in the "Core Kids" age range enjoying G1 Transformers
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y22...ay/g1_1986.jpg
HeHeh I had that Voltron. Parents didn't understand the difference between cars and lions :)
Yup, 6+.
And remember that G1 was "Ages 5 and Up."
I don't think that 6 year olds are necessarily this stupid, but rather Hasbro is assuming that they are. The tone of these toys is condescending to children which is usually a recipe for shelfwarmers.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Sure, some 6+ year olds are stupid. Usually... they grow up to be stupid adults.
Most kids of school age are smart enough to know when they're being spoken down to.
I see echoes of a particular, ever more common, online trend that I dislike appearing here, and I think G1 toys are often looked at with rose coloured glasses.
To try and stay on topic, I dislike this figure and won’t buy it, but comparing a “Warrior” class figure (and the parts count and paint app limitations that class has) to a “Deluxe” class is unfair, especially to a toy like FE Starscream who was the last gasp of a deluxe class at a complexity we’ve not seen since. The “Armada” Starscream or FOC Starscream would be slightly fairer comparisons (and yes Cyberverse Starscream would still pale).
From what I’ve seen, the closest comparative figures to these new Warrior class figures are the good old Fast Action Battlers.
The comparison photo has encouraged me to buy RID Starscream though.
As long as there’s context for the comparison I have no issue with G1 comparisons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulbot
Sure, G1 Starscream the unposeable partsformer doesn’t stack up against a lot of more modern Transformers, but in the context of the 1984 Transformers, he’s not a notably bad toy. Reflector was a Partsformer mess. Prime has add on fists that can’t hold his gun.
If we’re just doing a direct comparison between a G1 toy and a modern toy without that time setting context... well then yeah. Rose coloured glasses may be relevant.