Page 1003 of 1003 FirstFirst ... 9839939989991000100110021003
Results 10,021 to 10,029 of 10029

Thread: Transformers questions by newbies, and not-so-newbies

  1. #10021
    Join Date
    1st Oct 2018
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    700

    Default

    No, that's a seperate thing.

  2. #10022
    Join Date
    12th Jun 2011
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    5,400

    Default

    Does anyone else really not like the parts formers that HasTak has been doing in the last couple of Generations lines?

    I feel they are pretty damn lazy.
    I have a list of all G1 characters that have been released in CHUG form. You can find it here. Please feel free to let me know if I got anything wrong so I can fix it.

  3. #10023
    Join Date
    15th Aug 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,133

    Default

    I don't like all of the empty holes/sections in limbs that have a couple of bars across for strength.

  4. #10024
    Join Date
    14th Aug 2020
    Location
    Mildura
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DELTAprime View Post
    Does anyone else really not like the parts formers that HasTak has been doing in the last couple of Generations lines?

    I feel they are pretty damn lazy.
    I don't care for it, but it doesn't piss me off, and I'm certainly not avoiding a toy because of it. And I can understand why they do it - in the last two lines Hasbro's designers have been more restricted in their design options than normal, because the whole War For Cybertron thing is "it looks kinda like the cartoon, but slightly modernised". This puts real limits on what they can design; couple that with their existing limits for budget and child safety requirements, and you start to see that rather than being the easy way out, parts-forming for some toys may well have been the only way out. Yes, Cliffjumper and Bumblebee quite obviously could have been done without parts-forming; we've had at least one 3d printed kit that proves it. But could those couple of extra parts have been incorporated whilst remaining within Hasbro's budget for a deluxe?

    I have the same "really not an issue" approach to complaints about fake parts. Okay then, you don't like what they did with Earthrise Prime's midriff? Fine, you find another way to go from a wide and square truck front to a tapering abdominal section without going over budget. And that last part is why we get fake parts.

    If you (the general you, not you you ) want it to look like it stepped off the screen, and have a near-magical transformation sequence that keeps everything together, then you'd better be prepared to pay a lot more for your toys. Right now, for the most part, Hasbro doesn't seem prepared to make that kind of toy (but are at least testing the waters, with SS86 Hot Rod). I would suggest investigating the work of Magic Square Toys.

  5. #10025
    Join Date
    19th Dec 2008
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    3,058

    Default

    The Arcee/Elita-1 and upcoming Warpath ones definitely seem a little over the top on the partsforming, for sure. I don't mind it so much on the Cliffjumper/Bumblebee mold because at least it still stores in both modes and allows for different character models to be portrayed, but 'hey here's a shield/hoverboard' is a little bit overt, especially when the hoverboard doesn't really do anything to become the hoverboard. If it at least had a few panels that flipped out and made it look less like a bunch of alt-mode kibble then it wouldn't be so bad, but as it is...eh.

    I'm glad they haven't tried it with the upcoming SS Scourge or Kingdom Blackarachnia, those character designs seem like they'd be ripe for shield-forming.

  6. #10026
    Join Date
    14th Aug 2020
    Location
    Mildura
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Earthrise Arcee is a bad one, I'll grant that.

    You could make the argument that they need to parts-form/shell-form in order to make it look like Arcee from the cartoon (the idiotic sexbot look), but having got my hands on an Animated Arcee I can no longer really accept that. Seeing how they did Cyberverse Wildwheel doesn't make it any better. It turns out that yes, you can incorporate the body and limbs of a slender bot into the actual substance of a vehicle if you want. I can't argue against budget issues (there would be a lot of parts and joints), but I think they could do it if they threw a bit more money at this one toy and less at a few others (which seems to be what they do in a line anyway; there's always at least one toy per line, sometimes per wave, that clearly got less attention and effort than the others).

  7. #10027
    Join Date
    10th Mar 2016
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ode to a Grasshopper View Post
    those character designs seem like they'd be ripe for shield-forming.
    I really like this term.
    WTB
    G2 Gearhead
    G2 Soundwave

  8. #10028
    Join Date
    10th Mar 2016
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JJJ View Post
    I don't care for it, but it doesn't piss me off, and I'm certainly not avoiding a toy because of it. And I can understand why they do it - in the last two lines Hasbro's designers have been more restricted in their design options than normal, because the whole War For Cybertron thing is "it looks kinda like the cartoon, but slightly modernised". This puts real limits on what they can design; couple that with their existing limits for budget and child safety requirements, and you start to see that rather than being the easy way out, parts-forming for some toys may well have been the only way out. Yes, Cliffjumper and Bumblebee quite obviously could have been done without parts-forming; we've had at least one 3d printed kit that proves it. But could those couple of extra parts have been incorporated whilst remaining within Hasbro's budget for a deluxe?
    Yeah, all this. I did a parts count of ER Cliffjumper and as he is he has one of the highest parts counts for a deluxe, at least against what I compared it to. I suppose they could have ditched the weapon to give it the extra bits necessary to avoid shield-forming, but I feel like the weapon is a better choice in terms of giving people the perception of value, as not everyone understands how parts counts can affect the price of a toy. What I bet a lot of people don't realise is Siege Refraktor has a far lesser parts count than Cliffjumper, but nobody hesitated to buy three of those. Does being a head taller really make Refraktor a better figure in terms of value?
    WTB
    G2 Gearhead
    G2 Soundwave

  9. #10029
    Join Date
    4th Jan 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    606

    Default

    My general rule is not to buy any parts-forming TF toy unless the original toy or animation model on which it's based partformed (e.g. Skytread, Omega Supreme). If it's not based on an existing toy/character, it just shouldn't parts-form.
    Recent Acquisitions: ReAction Skyfire
    (Pre-)ordered: MP-51 Arcee
    Wants: Encore Headmasters!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •