Cyberverse - are the toys getting too simple or are people getting dumber?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Kinda answered your own question there Griff. Why pick a term which is potentially controversial (warranted or not) when you can choose a word with none of the connotations?

[Trent]

As long as there’s context for the comparison I have no issue with G1 comparisons.

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.

Have to disagree about Starscream. First time I handled one as a kid (mid eighties), I knew even in the context of toys of that day and age it was a disappointment. I remember clearly thinking “Is that it? It doesn’t do anything!”.

[dirge]

Have to disagree about Starscream. First time I handled one as a kid (mid eighties), I knew even in the context of toys of that day and age it was a disappointment. I remember clearly thinking “Is that it? It doesn’t do anything!”.

Yeah it wasn’t a standout back then. But, I mean, there were a few Transformers back then that were kibbleformers & add-on fists were common. Heck. Even Optimus Prime has a trailer than just sat to the side of the robot itself.

The fact the winds and tail fins detached makes it look worse than it is - technically they rotate to transform, rather than detach. But of course they detach very very easily.

[Bemblebuu]

The 'parts-formery' aspect of the original G1 seekers was always annoying to me as a kid, mainly because there'd always be that chance of losing something. As an adult, I look back on those toys as flawed but at least they were well made (the amount of die-cast metal alone was awesome). Say what you will about G1 figures, but the vast majority had fantastic vehicle/ alternate modes, even if the robot modes suffered.

The new Cyberverse line has mostly crap robot and alt modes. The plastic used feels cheap and there is no way in Hell these are worth what Hasbro/ retail want for them...which is really the crux of the matter for me, irrespective of whether these figures are 'meant just for kids'. They should be priced at at least a third of what they are asking.

[i_amtrunks]

My six year old nephew has really been bitten by the tf bug in the last three months. Loved his rid and rescuebits figures but prefers my spare predators and turbomasterswhen he comes to visit (also loves the real gear sublime from the first movie but can’t quite get the transformations as yet)

I showed him the pics of the first wave and asked if he’d like some of them as presents, his response of “no thanks, I want more of these” (whilst shoving rid battle bashers /whatever the two packs that combine are called in my face.

I think they’d be a good transformer for a three to four year old with no experience in the same way I think those ginormous brittle/ thin plastic figures that only have moving shoulders (which there are tf ones) are good toys... not very much and please never for my kid. There are bootleg knockoff toys with better feeling plastic and designs than these, for a much more appealing price.

I know the retailers drive a lot of these decisions now, but those are the same idiots who only buy a thousand wave one movie figures and wonder why they don’t sell...

[DELTAprime]

I know not everyone will agree but I like the simplified engineering we have on more recent figures over the figures that were complicated up because of the Bayverse success. While yes there are plenty of great figures from that era before the re-simplification there are also those that were needlessly complicated. I want to have fun with my Transformers and a transformation that strikes the balance of it's just plain fun and not boring is right for me.

And frankly one of my favorite Transformers is the electronic RB Optimus Primal, a one step transformation which is just fun.

Though I do miss the solidness of figures like my Henkei Convoy and now that we have lost Takara's higher quality paint jobs I'm missing that also.

[Galvatran]

Have to disagree about Starscream. First time I handled one as a kid (mid eighties), I knew even in the context of toys of that day and age it was a disappointment. I remember clearly thinking “Is that it? It doesn’t do anything!”.

As a kid I was blown away with the nosecone threading through the chest cavity. I still do today.

[FatalityPitt]

As a kid I was blown away with the nosecone threading through the chest cavity. I still do today.

That part of the transformation confused me when I was a kid . I thought it was amazing how the arms formed the fuselage.

The point I wanted to make with the G1 Jets was this - even though they weren't very good toys even back then, Transformers was still a very new thing in the 1980's. Even though Hasbro had a plan on how to market the toys, no one knew with certainty how they'd do commercially in the west, or what it would take to make them successful. In 2018, Hasbro should now have Transformers boiled down to a science.

Hasbro had 34 years to perfect the formula, yet they've come up with these Cyberverse figures, and are selling them for more than what they're worth. If the Cyberverse figures we're re-issues of toys from the early 1990's, I'd forgive them for selling them so expensively since they'd have some historical/nostalgic value. BUT they're not. These are new moulds, and by now, Hasbro should be able to do much better given the price they're asking for.

Just my honest opinion

[GoktimusPrime]

The G1 Jets were by no means flawless. Their greatest flaw is the fact that they needlessly rely too heavily on detachable parts. The wings and both horizontal and vertical stabilisers are detachable for no discernible reason. How many G1 Jets do you find on the secondary market missing all of its accessories? Without their accessories they can neither form a jet or a proper robot (or at most, a robot with no fists). In this regard even G1 Ratchet and Ironhide are better toys because even if you lose all of their accessories including the decks, the core toy is still a fully formed robot that can even transform into a four wheeled vehicle (basically a ute).

But having said that, the G1 Jets didn't have a condescending tone to their design as a result of being slave to a gimmick. The Jets would've been a whole lot better if the wings and stabilisers had been permanently attached. And then there's price - the G1 Jets retailed for roughly $40 by today's standard, only $5~10 dearer than what these Cyberverse Warriors are selling for. Even with their drawbacks, I still think that the G1 Jets offer loads more value for money than say Cyberverse Starscream.

And I still don't buy the "Ages 6+" defence. Many of us were around that age (give or take a few years) when we got our first G1 toy. These were the toys that made us life-long collectors. It'll be interesting to see how many kids playing with these Cyberverse toys today will still be collectors for Transformers when they get older. A good toy is one that you don't just love today but will continue to love tomorrow.

[FatalityPitt]

I still think that the G1 Jets offer loads more value for money than say Cyberverse Starscream.

Yeah. The G1 Jets had die cast metal parts.