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

[GoktimusPrime]

But as you said, Rescue Bots have heft. Cyberverse toys on the other hand have notably less mass compared to the RiD ver 2 toys.
e.g.
Robots In Disguise Warrior Class Optimus Prime (without his weapon) is 91g vs Cyberverse Warrior Shockwave who's only 68g. So despite a $10 hike in price, Cyberverse is giving us figures with about 23g less toy. That's not incredibly good bang for your buck.

If they want to give us cheaper and simpler toys, fine... so bring the price down.
As I said in my Cyberverse Ultimate Optimus Prime review, this toy wouldn't be so bad if it retailed at about $40 instead of $60. The Cyberverse Warrior toys wouldn't be so bad if they were about $20 instead of $35.

But quite frankly, if they're going to charge us the current price of a Deluxe POTP for a Warrior Cyberverse then I'd expect a similar standard of quality. If they're going to price the Ultimates at above Voyager Class (and just $10 shy of Ultra Class), then I'd damn well expect the standard to be somewhere in between those two Classes. If you want to pitch the toys lower, fine... but lower the price.

This is why I never much got into the Fast Action Battlers when they came out in 2007. Simplified versions of Movieformers at the same price of a Deluxe. Remember how badly FAB Brawl pegwarmed? That toy retailed for the same RRP as Deluxe Brawl, and Deluxe Brawl sold really well while FAB Brawl gathered dust. Even worse was the redeco "Desert Attack FAB Brawl." Even though the FABs were aimed a younger audience, it's clear that kids preferred the Deluxe because they want toys that engage them at a higher level.

Think about when Transformers started waning in popularity. It was generally around the time where more less-engaging toys that were more gimmick-laden became more numerous. We know that it was dwindling toy sales that prompted Hasbro to cancel the US G1 cartoon after only 3 episodes into Season Four. And we know that after Action Masters came along in 1990 toy sales took a further plunge resulting in the cancellation of Transformers in America as well as the cancellation of the G1 comics in 1991. 2 years later and G1 was dead.

And we know that Transformers came back when Beast Wars came along. And Beast Wars had some really simple Transformers too -- just look at the Flipchangers. They were literally 1-Step Changers. But they weren't condescending in tone like 1-Step Changers today. The figures themselves weren't compromised by the Flipchange gimmick. 1-Step Changers tend to be bricks in robot mode, whereas the Flipchangers all have no fewer than 9 points of articulation. Plus weapon storage. All for what would be the equivalent of about $15 by today's standard. Compare this with the Ultimate Class leaders in Cyberverse. They have decent leg articulation, but from waist up it's a G1-level of articulation -- i.e. any articulation is incidental as necessitated by the transformation as opposed to being explicitly engineered for the sake of poseability. Ultimate Class Optimus Prime has articulated arms for the same reason as to why the original G1 Optimus Prime has articulated arms -- it's because of the way the arms transform. Okay, granted the inclusion of elbows and head articulation is purposeful and that's what makes him a loads better toy than Megatron which sorely lacks these things (but would be massively improved with them). But really, while this was fine by 1980s standards it's pretty poor for 2018. Not for sixty freaking dollars.

And remember when Robots In Disguise first hit shelves in 2001? This was months before the cartoon started airing, so kids had no exposure to the show yet -- but the toys were FLYING off shelves as soon as they came out! And those toys weren't simplistic - these were the toys that would go on to inspire Binaltech and Masterpiece. But kids love them! These kids are now young adults and I've met a few of them who are collectors now, who keenly remember playing with RID as their childhood toys in the same way that we remember G1 as our childhood figures.

Anyway, time will tell. Let's see if these toys start selling like hot cakes or if they linger as dust-gathering shelfwarmers. Let's see if the kids who are playing with Cyberverse today will become fans for life or if they'll just end up... qu... qui... quitting Transformers (that was hard to say... I need to wash my mouth out).

[FatalityPitt]

It's like Nestle incrementally reducing the size of the Kit Kat bars and thinking they could keep charging the same amount as before.

Our criticisms may be harsh sometimes, but someone has to speak up, or else the companies producing these things will continue pushing the envelope to see how much they can get away with for the sake of boosting profit. We want them to be profitable, but not that way.

[Galvatran]

Let's see if the kids who are playing with Cyberverse today will become fans for life or if they'll just end up... qu... qui... quitting Transformers (that was hard to say... I need to wash my mouth out).

Commentary like this does absolutely nothing to define the Line's success or failure. It's a throw away line that rears it's head ever so often in the fandom. I can't speak for Hasbro but I'm pretty sure they set themselves targets for success: Net sales value, profit, distribution, brand invigoration, etc. It would not involve putting this Line on a pedestal.

[Trent]

Commentary like this does absolutely nothing to define the Line's success or failure. It's a throw away line that rears it's head ever so often in the fandom. I can't speak for Hasbro but I'm pretty sure they set themselves targets for success: Net sales value, profit, distribution, brand invigoration, etc. It would not involve putting this Line on a pedestal.

Yep. One line that my son also collects is Paw Patrol. To set the scene, think of the most horribly executed transformers line you have collected. I guarantee that Paw Patrol toys are worse. For a rrp of $20, you get a phoned in figure, likeness is good but that’s where it ends. The most basic 5 point articulation that most the time doesn’t work due to the gummy plastic used. Vehicles are just hunks of plastic on wheels with crappy gimmicks that don’t work, let alone simulate the capabilities of that particular vehicle in the show. And the absolute biggest fail of the whole line: the dogs don’t peg in to their vehicles. They look great sitting there but the second you move one of them the dog just falls out. This makes play incredibly frustrating for all involved. So overall, Based on that information alone, most would call the line a failure. Yet they fly off the shelves. My kid loves them. If one is released in the US but not here, eBay prices skyrocket. When he sees a new one, he wants it without fail and with complete disregard to the crappiness of all before it.

The point is, there are numerous examples of crappy toy lines being successful. It’s the marketing that sells the toys. Remember, you don’t sell the sausage, you sell the sizzle.

[GoktimusPrime]

Commentary like this does absolutely nothing to define the Line's success or failure. It's a throw away line that rears it's head ever so often in the fandom. I can't speak for Hasbro but I'm pretty sure they set themselves targets for success: Net sales value, profit, distribution, brand invigoration, etc. It would not involve putting this Line on a pedestal.

That can also depend on what proportion of the line these toys occupy. The current/new stuff we have on shelves atm are:
* Power of the Primes
* Studio Series
* Cyberverse
And later this year we'll also have the Bumblebee movie toys.

So yeah, Cyberverse are occupying approximately a third of the toyline, and by year's end it will be roughly a quarter. This isn't nearly as bad as what happened in 1990 where the horrible compromised toys occupied half of the toyline. And we know that that was the beginning of the end for G1.

Another thing to consider is brand momentum. Another reason why Action Masters helped to kill off G1 is because Transformers had already been losing momentum since 1987. It was already a shrinking brand by the time Action Masters came along and kicked the brand in the janglies. Now compare this with say Beast Machines and Animorphs which followed the highly successful Beast Wars. As widely disliked as those toys were, they still didn't kill off Transformers because the fandom was still riding off the coattails of Beast Wars' popularity. From Beast Wars Transformers had fallen from a high into a low, but then recovered by the time Car Robot/RiD came along. There was another dip in 2002, but again the momentum was still there, and it recovered again in 2003 with Armada - enough momentum that Hasbro was convinced to go ahead with the idea of a live action film for Transformers.

The problem with Action Masters was that it took Transformers from an already low point - the cartoon had already been cancelled and the fandom was already weakened - to a much lower point. The brand can take "hits" if it's coming from a position of relative strength. And yeah, the brand at the moment is incredibly strong, so I would not at all expect Cyberverse to really put much of a dent in it.

So I'm not at all crying "RUINED FOREVER" with these toys and saying that these figures will spell the end for Transformers. We've all seen Transformers survive through much, much worse than this (like Action Masters). We remember what it was like being a Transformers collector through way tougher times (like the mid 1990s). These toys aren't concerning me from a POV of it ruining the franchise... but they're still inexcusably poor toys. And shelfwarmers hurt the brand. Probably not enough to ruin it, but it's not doing it any favours either.

And yeah, "throw away line" pretty much encapsulates the inherently flawed philosophy behind these toys.

[BigTransformerTrev]

Been interesting to read everyone's responses to this topic. By now so there are so many points others have made that I want to respond too it would take too long to quote/coy/paste/edit each one so I'll just chuck in some general comments on the latest discussions

RID vs RB vs Cyberverse

RB vs Cyberverse
*Frankly Rescue Bots were awesome! They came out at a time where both myself and lots of close friends had very little boys at home and they were perfect to introduce them to Transformer toys. As others have noted, they are strongly built, very hardy (except for bloody Quickshadow - what an awful toy!) and a lot of fun for younger kids, especially when you add all the extras like bases and Mini-Con animals that became tools for the bigger bots. Add into that a cartoon with no Decepticons so kids got to see Autobots act as recusing heroes instead of warriors and it's proven a highly successful endeavor.

*I don't think it's massively fair to say 'well Rescue Bots were simplistic so whats peoples problem with Cyberverse' as they are aimed at different nieches. Indeed there is a RB spinoff cartoon coming up so we know that Cyberverse wont be aimed at the really younger kids. And besides, at least a lot of the RB toys looked good, the likes of Brushfire has a lot more visual appeal in both modes than the new Warrior Starscream.

RID vs Cyberverse
*The reason RID doesn't seem to cop a ton of flak is that most people tuned out to it ages ago. The cartoon has been fairly lackluster and has not generated the kind of loyal following that Animated and Prime did before. People just don't pay attention
*The toys have not been the most horrible ever made but certainly not the best. For kids around the 5+ mark they aren't too bad, though not complicated enough to entrance the older kids and certainly not adults. The combiner groups later on were particularly poorly done.
*RID tried to bridge the gap between the movieverse-style of Prime and the old G1 aesthetic. So while it was the same universe as Prime you now had:

-Talking Bumblebee
-Talking Grimlock
-Sideswipe: Red sports car
-Optimus: Big trailer on his truck mode
-Ratchet nearly all white with a windscreen chest
-Starscream in G1 colours
-Toys of Bludgeon, Skywarp, Cyclonus, Ratbat etc all with a G1'ish asthetic
-Motormaster leading the Stunticons and combining into Menasor

Add into that trying to introduce a ton of new semi-animal themed Cons and the cartoon and toyline tried to do too much and never really shined at any of it. It will most likely be a cartoon and toyline that will disappear and people will say 'Oh yeah, yeah it was ok I guess'.

*It remains to be seen what the Cyberverse cartoon will be like in comparison to the RID cartoon. They are certainly pushing the G1 theme a lot more than RID did, and maybe that will be more successful as a theme than one you cant pin down. Depends how good the characterization in the cartoon is done, hope its a lot better than the function descriptions on the toys.
*But if the RID toys were a bit too dumbed down for a lot of fans, the Cyberverse toys look like they are definitely too dumbed down for almost all the fans. The more images that come out of the toys online the more people seem to think they suck, and that includes kids! Like many have said, kids don't like being talked down too, and given the price tags for these lackluster toys there are so many better things a kid could get in a toy store for that much cash. As for the adult collectors, I reckon mmany will save their bucks and skip the line altogether.

KIDS LIKE HIGHER QUALITY TOYS BETTER!

Example: Titans Return Twinferno vs RID Twinferno

Packaging says RID is for 6+ and TR is for 8+

I have both and I'm not going to give my perspective - I'm going to give it from a pair of 5 & 6 year old boys.

My son picked the RID version to give to his mate for his mates 6th birthday several months ago. At the Big W Toysale he picked a TR version for himself. His mate came over the other week and brought his TF's to play with my son and his.

RID Twinferno hardly got a look in because they both thought that the TR version looked cooler in both modes, and with better articulation, a Titan Master, a couple of rifles etc was more fun to play with. As a result this toy, that is apparently aimed at kids older than them, was one they both figured out how to transform without assistance.

Kids don't need to be talked down to by the manufacturer. They need to have their sensibilities appealed to. And higher quality toys always have a better shot at that.

[GoktimusPrime]

Well said, Trev. Agree 100%.

[BigTransformerTrev]

Well said, Trev. Agree 100%.

Cheers mate I thought the Twinferno example particularly apt, mainly because of what I witnessed but also because it's a character neither boy had seen in a cartoon or movie, so both lads were judging the toys based on their appeal and playability, rather than how much they liked an onscreen character


I reckon Galvatran has a point about they probably did do market research before producing the Cyberverse line. But given that that research was probably based in America and done with families who had the time to do it, that doesn't bode great. The US ranks around the middle internationally for Science and Literacy and below average for Mathematics. Given they probably didn't do market research with the cream-of-the-crop, they may have undershot what kids of certain ages expected of toys when considered on an international level. A 5 year old Aussie kid (who averages significantly higher in the three mentioned academic areas - Google it folks!) might expect more complexity and quality than his US equivalent. That's purely speculation on my part of course and I could very well be completely wrong.

[GoktimusPrime]

I'm sure that Hasbro play tests all of their toys. I suppose one potential problem with focus test groups is that it's always going to be a fairly limited sample of people that you're testing it on. While I'm sure it works most of the time, there may be times where the group tests different from how the overall market responds. It sometimes happens for other products like say movies.

e.g. the test audience for Apocalypse Now performed really poorly with the test audience who rated the film as "boring."

Or heck, how many times have you come up with what you thought was a really good lesson plan and then it worked really brilliantly with one class... but then totally bombed with your other classes (or vice versa)?