JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:I think they tried that in the commercials for Beast Machines, under the motto "The Challenge is in the Change". Need I say more?
Va'al wrote:JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:I think they tried that in the commercials for Beast Machines, under the motto "The Challenge is in the Change". Need I say more?
Fneh.
I know that quite a few Asian conventions and gatherings have timed transforming challenges (they might happen in North America and Europe too, I just haven't read about them), and it does sound like fun.
But making it an actual marketing strategy..? Hm. Not sure.
BeastProwl wrote:And thats why I love the AEC stuff. Its simple, but poseable, and what bricks there are serve a purpose. They look good, and are loaded with details, and have gimmicks out the butt. I dont think upscaled legends is a good idea. At all.
Not unless we get a Voyager Hardshell, and even then it'll be VERY lacking.
Burn wrote:Then again, their attention spans are getting shorter.
JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:Burn wrote:Then again, their attention spans are getting shorter.
And who can we blame for that? Seriously, who can we blame for that?
Burn wrote:I look at it more as a dumbing down of the line ... which says a lot of what Hasbro must think of kids these days.
Then again, their attention spans are getting shorter.
dirk2243 wrote:I "get it" I'm not necessarily a fan of the idea. But I get it.
But I still think..... why not just leave it as Cyberverse? Thats why you made them right Hasbro? Leave the easy transformations to the cyberverse, and leave the normal size TFs as is. Maybe if done right I guess it could work, but I have my doubts based on past records.
Convotron wrote:
There is an active thread right now in the toy forum where MP-09 is the topic. That toy is a clear example of compromised design due to trying to be too complicated and complex by nature of being designed with multi function goals in mind. Complexity is not necessarily a good thing. Especially complexity for complexity's sake.
dirk2243 wrote:But I still think..... why not just leave it as Cyberverse? Thats why you made them right Hasbro? Leave the easy transformations to the cyberverse, and leave the normal size TFs as is. Maybe if done right I guess it could work, but I have my doubts based on past records.
Convotron wrote:dirk2243 wrote:But I still think..... why not just leave it as Cyberverse? Thats why you made them right Hasbro? Leave the easy transformations to the cyberverse, and leave the normal size TFs as is. Maybe if done right I guess it could work, but I have my doubts based on past records.
Why not leave the toys as Cyberverse? That's like asking why Tonka doesn't exclusively make their construction toys the same size as Hot Wheels 1:64 scale toys.
The answer is simple: Physical presence is often perceived as a positive aspect of play value in toys, particularly for younger kids.
These upsized Cyberverse toys are meant to serve in a strategy to further strengthen Hasbro's ongoing effort in ushering in the younger portion of their target customer base.
Upsized toys also mean less investment needed in comparison to R&D for entirely brand new molds.
dirk2243 wrote:That is why I said I get it.....
Lets say they make these up scaled and normal TF's of the same mold....
If there priced the same, I doubt a kid is going to pick the up scaled one if the normal TF looks better.
dirk2243 wrote:Seriously. I've seen many parents fold to there kids while in the TF aisle about what they want and what the kids wants. Some do stick to there guns, but if there is no difference in price I don't see these selling (if there is the exact same figure available as a normal deluxe)
dirk2243 wrote:Lets say out of ten parents, how many are really going to notice that these are up scaled vs normal?
They will do better if they don't make the one available in a normal deluxe version...... (which is what I honestly see happening and the only thing I see that will move these things) But if they make yet another mold of bumblebee....(which if past proves anything they will) and other molds already available I see these up scaled TFs as shelf warmers. Or if they are priced accordingly. That will go a long way to moving these things. But if they are up scaled Cyberverse, and priced the same, they will be more hollow then FOC Bruticus (Terrorcons for example)
Gizmodo interview wrote:Trial By Five Year Olds
Transformers designers at Hasbro are typically working on about 200 figures at any given time, ranging from products that are coming up that year, to ones that won't be seen for two or three more years. "We're predicting what kids will be playing with in 2015," says Lamb. It isn't easy.
In fact, it's hard enough to figure out what kids like right now. To that end, Hasbro has set up what it calls the "Fun Lab" at its Providence location. Here, local kids from grade schools, middle schools, and daycares are ferried in—after their parents sign strict non-disclosure agreements—and given the toys of the future to mess around with. There's some structure to the sessions, but mostly, they just revolve around a simple idea: Figure out what's fun.
The design process is hugely informed by what goes on in these play sessions. If a bunch of kids all agree that beast Transformers biting stuff is awesome, or that fighter jets without missiles are idiotic—these are "play patterns," in toymaker parlance—Lenny will be armed with that information going in. These are focus groups, more or less, but with audiences that are uniquely qualified to give answers—Hey, is this toy fun to play with or not fun to play with?—instead of a room full of grownups who just happen to have a bunch of free time during the middle of the day.
dirk2243 wrote:And not one person is saying the sky is falling. I enjoy my stocks in the company just like the next person, but..... 2010 was there best year lately. Maybe R & D isn't a waste of time. Which is one reason why you can see Hasbro's push for more films.....
Convotron wrote:dirk2243 wrote:That is why I said I get it.....
Lets say they make these up scaled and normal TF's of the same mold....
If there priced the same, I doubt a kid is going to pick the up scaled one if the normal TF looks better.
With all due respect, you are repeating the same logical fallacy that every person who disagrees with Hasbro's Transformers product decisions. You infer that the less simple toy will not look better than a more complex toy to a random, average child.dirk2243 wrote:Seriously. I've seen many parents fold to there kids while in the TF aisle about what they want and what the kids wants. Some do stick to there guns, but if there is no difference in price I don't see these selling (if there is the exact same figure available as a normal deluxe)
The price is different at least in the case of the upcoming BH Voyagers, which according to the product information cards at Botcon 2013, state MSRP of $19.99.
As far as parents folding, anecdotal experience is not evidence or any reliable indication of the purchasing habits of people with children in a single city, let alone a country. You could have simply witnessed poor examples of parenting in your limited observation of people shopping with children.dirk2243 wrote:Lets say out of ten parents, how many are really going to notice that these are up scaled vs normal?
They will do better if they don't make the one available in a normal deluxe version...... (which is what I honestly see happening and the only thing I see that will move these things) But if they make yet another mold of bumblebee....(which if past proves anything they will) and other molds already available I see these up scaled TFs as shelf warmers. Or if they are priced accordingly. That will go a long way to moving these things. But if they are up scaled Cyberverse, and priced the same, they will be more hollow then FOC Bruticus (Terrorcons for example)
Parents aren't going to necessarily notice because the average parent isn't looking specifically for scaled up toys.
You keep mentioning attributes such as hollowness or the subjective trait of how good something looks to children as a qualifier for how well or poorly a product performs.
Does a normal child pick up a toy, still in package, shake it and say "Hmm, this feels more hollow than the other toys of the same price range."?
Is there a study that shows that the average child looks at an upscaled Cyberverse Deluxe Bumblebee and a Beast Hunters Deluxe Bumblebee and point to the standard Deluxe to say it is undoubtedly the better looking one?
Hasbro states that it puts their toys, while in development, through a play testing stage at a facility called the "Fun Lab". They have five year old children perform the play tests. Notice on the Transformers packaging that it basically states "For ages 5 and up".
It's not a bulletproof method of knowing with absolute certainty the appeal of toy design for every child out there but it's a controlled testing environment.Gizmodo interview wrote:Trial By Five Year Olds
Transformers designers at Hasbro are typically working on about 200 figures at any given time, ranging from products that are coming up that year, to ones that won't be seen for two or three more years. "We're predicting what kids will be playing with in 2015," says Lamb. It isn't easy.
In fact, it's hard enough to figure out what kids like right now. To that end, Hasbro has set up what it calls the "Fun Lab" at its Providence location. Here, local kids from grade schools, middle schools, and daycares are ferried in—after their parents sign strict non-disclosure agreements—and given the toys of the future to mess around with. There's some structure to the sessions, but mostly, they just revolve around a simple idea: Figure out what's fun.
The design process is hugely informed by what goes on in these play sessions. If a bunch of kids all agree that beast Transformers biting stuff is awesome, or that fighter jets without missiles are idiotic—these are "play patterns," in toymaker parlance—Lenny will be armed with that information going in. These are focus groups, more or less, but with audiences that are uniquely qualified to give answers—Hey, is this toy fun to play with or not fun to play with?—instead of a room full of grownups who just happen to have a bunch of free time during the middle of the day.
Source: http://gizmodo.com/5994962/autobots-ass ... me-to-life
Below is Clint Chapman, Hasbro's Global Brand Manager for Transformers, being interviewed by Vangelus at Botcon 2013. The entire video is valuable for gaining insight into the current direction Hasbro is taking with the brand.
Starting at 12:05 is where Vangelus asks Clint Chapman about the idea of using upsized Cyberverse toys as a new strategy for an entry level toy type.
At 13:20, Vangelus speculates that the quickest way to take the strategy to market for testing is to use existing "strong" Cyberverse toy designs, scale them up, and see how they do with the customers(kids 5 years and up).
At 13:40, Clint Chapman says that they took a look at G1, considered the origin of the Transformers brand products, says that G1 Wheeljack took about 5 steps to transform whereas movie Wheeljack(Que?) took 5 steps just to transform the feet.
He, Clint Chapman, therefore Hasbro at this time, has no intent to mess with the design strategy of a line like Generations.
However, for the "5 and 6 year olds"(again Hasbro states on Transformers toy packages that they are meant for ages 5 and up), they are having a more difficult time with 20 step transformations. Remember the Fun Lab where 5 year olds are the play testers? That is where he very likely bases his assertion.
Clint Chapman goes on to say that aside from the Cyberverse line, there is no other truly entry level products for Transformers(he does not mean other toylines within the Transformers brand such as Rescue Bots).
The upsized Cyberverse toys is Hasbro's test in the real market to see how well these kinds of Transformers toys will work as entry level toys. The intent is to hopefully have another Thrilling 30 in 30 years. A way to do this is to gain a new generation of fans who will grow up with the brand as many of us have.dirk2243 wrote:And not one person is saying the sky is falling. I enjoy my stocks in the company just like the next person, but..... 2010 was there best year lately. Maybe R & D isn't a waste of time. Which is one reason why you can see Hasbro's push for more films.....
The OP stated that they hope the size class of Deluxe doesn't become a simplified and there is sentiment that the move to take another strategy to introducing entry level Transformers toy options as decreasing the complexity of the Transformers toyline. This is a gross overreaction to the introduction of some Cyberverse toys as upsized products. Hence, the sky is falling.
Hasbro's push for more films comes from the fact that The Transformers, Revenge of the Fallen, and Dark of the Moon, have garnered billions of dollars in revenue. Dark of the Moon is the most commercially successful of the first three Transformers movies, grossing $1,123,746,996 worldwide. That's box office results alone. That does not include revenue from everything else the movie spawned(other media, toys, DVD sales, etc.).
From previous commercial performance of the live action films, Hasbro is able to judge that another film will very, very, very likely do well and garner comparable commercial success.
dirk2243 wrote:Yes....I am repeating the same "logic" that others repeat about every character hasbro puts out that others do not like. Some are great, some are ok, some are just ROTF combiner DEVY sound familiar?
dirk2243 wrote:And I wouldn't bring the argument of there study rooms for 5 yr olds as great scientific evidence. By that logic these 5 year olds had a huge up bringing in the shelf warming Voyager Predacon and BH Prime and now its shelf warming Ultimate Predacon and Prime. Considering the "fun labs are far and few between in a limited area and kids are brought there to play by parents who aren't committed to buy anything. That is about as scientific as how you put it... my limited observation of people.... I've taken my son to one two years ago for Mattel and its like ohh.....new toys..... There were two other children in there with him in there and they kept switching to new toys.
dirk2243 wrote:A third of the G-1 TF's were just as big as cyberverse. G-1 Bumblebee isn't much bigger then his Cyberverse version today. And just as articulate. They made Cyberverse for the younger children and for this faster playability. Now I'm just paying more for the exact same toy I can get for five bucks in the smaller version. It's like tricking parents and children into the whole....oh, your ready for a bigger and better toy oh... but not really better.
dirk2243 wrote:Time will tell if this was a great idea, and I do believe they will sell (as long as they don't have normal deluxe counterpart look a like to compete with) But if parents know it is the exact
same toy they can get for cheaper but a little smaller.....
gavinfuzzy wrote:Dotm Wheeljack took 5 steps to transform his legs?
Who's that again?
You mean the one you... Never released?
Convotron wrote:gavinfuzzy wrote:Dotm Wheeljack took 5 steps to transform his legs?
Who's that again?
You mean the one you... Never released?
Haha, exactly!
Though, as I understand it, one of the factors behind its cancellation for US release(it was released in Japan, right?) was lack of interest from retailers. I suppose that could mean that not enough retailers in the US ordered or ordered quantities significant enough to warrant production for the North American market.
For those who care to speculate, it could be seen as one example of validation for moving back from the level of complexity displayed at the height of complex Transformers toy design in the movie lines.
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Glyph, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], MSN [Bot]