Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

I think everyone gets way too hung up on the names of the lines. Hasbro frequently shoe-horns mismatched bots into a movie or current line to throw a bone to G1 fans...

And they can't KEEP a line too long, or it loses steam and their sales drop. They constantly have to rename the line to keep it selling and seeming "fresh" to kids... and looking like new toys on the shelf.

I guess my big point is, a little common sense can help sort out where these figures are intended to be displayed. AND Sometimes that's subjective, too.

I'd also note that a board room of corporate big wigs and marketers don't necessarily know the characters and history as well as we do. I'm guessing they haven't read the UK comics, watched the Headmasters cartoon, or read up on Brazilian minibots. Sometimes we know better how to display, organize, and name the characters. (like when they lose the rights to a trademarked name... like ole Trailcutter.)

But case in point — Trailbreaker has an earth mode... totally doesn't fit in with the cybertronian mode FOC bots. He definitely fits with CHUG the best of any lineup.

IDW, I'll probably start a separate "shelf" for them. They don't really fit anywhere well, though they're kinda cool.

As for the Aligned Continuity, while it sounds like a nice thought — to me, it's a bad mash-up of G1, movie, and IDW into a big ole nasty "Autobot Spike" mess. I can't see myself putting that scheme over my own organization any time soon, though I'm sure it will be a fun read in the upcoming hardback book. Looking forward to reading about the 13, especially.

I think a lot of confusion comes from the fact that the Generations toyline, in a very rare move uncommon with most other toylines, has multiple aesthetics within it, which a lot people don't realize.

And it's because of this fact that I'm beginning to feel that the term "CHUG" has become outdated and obsolete since it originally referred to an aesthetic that the "G" part in the name no longer adheres to. It made sense back in 2010-2011 after the phase of the WFC toys ended and the Classics-style toys' phase was in motion. But ever since 2012, the term seems to no longer strictly apply to what people originally perceived it to mean since the Generations toyline has grown and evolved so far as to completely throw the meaning of "CHUG" right out the window.

With Classics in 2006, things were simple. Take G1 characters and give them new toys with modern day engineering, all in a single aesthetic.

Then came Universe with a similar yet more advanced mindset: Take classic characters from multiple series (G1, Beast Wars, Armada, etc.) and give them new toys with modern day engineering, also all in a single aesthetic.

Though both toylines also had some redecos/remolds of existing toy molds from non-Classics/non-Universe toylines (mostly from the Unicron Trilogy lines), these were extras and not too far off from the aesthetic that the Classics and Universe toylines were going for.

Then we get Generations, which at first seemed like another line similar to the two, but over time became much more than merely the "G" in "CHUG". With Generations, its mindset seems to be "Take characters from multiple series and fictions, regardless of how old or how recent, and give them toys with modern day engineering, all within differing aesthetics divided into phases."

The first phase used a WFC aesthetic, while the second phase was the familiar "Classics-style" aesthetic of the Classics and Universe lines, and what caused people to coin the term "CHUG".

But then came the third phase, which used a FOC aesthetic, which wasn't too dissimilar from the WFC aesthetic of the first phase.

And now we're coming to the fourth phase of "Thrilling 30", which uses an aesthetic belonging to the IDW G1 comics. But because the IDW G1 comics themselves have grown to start using designs based off existing toys, such as Masterpiece, Universe, and Generations Phase 2 toys, and more recently using designs taken from the WFC/FOC video games, the line between what are and aren't IDW toys becomes blurred. Thus, though the Thrilling 30 toys are meant to be based around the aesthetics of the IDW G1 comics, we get examples like Thundercracker who uses a WFC/FOC design thanks to IDW using that design for their G1 comics. Thus, Thundercracker's toy falls under TWO aesthetics instead of one, whereas someone like Springer, who's toy is based off his "Last Stand of the Wreckers" body, falls into just one aesthetic. Same with Trailcutter.

But, the issue is further complicated when toys like Trailcutter and Springer (his GDO toy aside) represent characters who haven't yet received any new (non-Legends) toy with modern day engineering, thus influencing people's wantings to put toys like Trailcutter and Springer into their CHUG/Classics-style collections for completion's sake, despite the toys actually being in an IDW G1 comics aesthetic. But again, the line of IDW G1 and non-IDW G1 aesthetics becomes blurred by IDW G1 already using designs from Universe, Masterpiece, and Generations Phase 2, thus making certain toys fit into BOTH aesthetics as a result. But when one adamantly wants to keep aesthetics separated, then one's CHUG/Classics-style collection is left without a (non-Legends) Trailbreaker/Trailcutter or Springe toy to fill in the void, repurposed toys aside.

This is when one must ask themselves what exactly is the difference between the aesthetics of "CHUG"/"Classics-style" and "IDW G1", especially when we see IDW G1 comic stories featuring the likes of Generations Thrilling 30 Trailcutter coexisting in the same world as Warpath and Black Shadow in their Generations Phase 2/"CHUG"/"Classics-style" bodies, or even with Sunstreaker who had his Universe body beginning with "All Hail Megatron". Where is the line drawn when IDW G1 uses the designs taken from the aesthetic of Classics, Universe, CHUG Generations in its own aesthetic? And where is it drawn when IDW G1 uses WFC/FOC aesthetic designs?

Food for thought.

Really good job summing it all up. Cheers!

Quite a quandary. It really goes to show that there's no clear cut way to easily solve this puzzle... else we wouldn't be here all debating and arguing our many valid viewpoints.

I remember there being some discussion by the Takara designers at Botcon ... wanting to differentiate that some of the toys were specifically designed to be re-invented modern vehicle forms... and others (later) were very slavish, homages to the G1 vehicles. I think Mirage is a great example of the former — his stance and vehicle are clearly not G1 cartoon accurate. I think Hound might be one of the ones more like the latter. Pretty spot on in both modes.

That said, I think Trailcutter can squeeze onto the shelf with those characters as well as any of those early waves. They're not G1 cartoon accurate, but excellent homages. Respectful enough that we all kind of lump them into a Neo-G1 shelf together.

And again, I'm just talking about aesthetics and personal choice/display — not actual lines or "official" delineation. Just saying I think he can fit in "under the radar." heh.

Why in the hell do you keep saying IDW is G1? It is not. G1 is just that. G1 has not existed since 1990. The IDW version of Transformers goes hand in hand with FOC/WFC. This is evident in the fact that they use each others designs. There is no story or spotlight on any story replicated from G1. The fact that the dinobots and insecticons exist pre-earth should tip you off of this fact. And the fact bots like Springer and co appear. In G1, they did not come on the scene until season 3. As far as the new "thrilling 30" toys go, Blitzwing itself is DEFINITELY not g1. His face proves that. And I do not recall Springer towering over Ultra Magnus or even Optimus for that matter.
Like I told the other guy, yes these are IDW figures. THEY ARE NOT G1. It is that simple. Geewun is dead and has been for two decades now. Move on. Live in the now. And now it is all about WFC/FOC/IDW.
To the guy above that mentions Warpath, funny you mention him. I firmly believe that his Generations toy is a WFC figure. Before you go all nerd rage on me, consider this. Look at it. It looks almost identical to the WFC verison. More square than rounded like the video game, but definitely closer to the WFC than geewun. Adn before you give me that the pre 2012 Generations toys that were WFC said "cybertronian", consider Cliffjumpers figure did not and his is definitely WFC. And the fact that Warpaths alt mode says "cybertronian tank" in the description backs this up. It doesn't look like or say earth tank mode. As a matter of fact, the only geewun correlation it has it that it is a tank, its red, and it is called Warpath. So was the scout from the TFTM toyline. And that abomination was definitely not Warpath.

shockblast2 wrote:Why in the hell do you keep saying IDW is G1?

Textbook Nerd Rage, right there.

I hope you don't think I'M the one believing IDW = G1. Far from it. Just chatting on the best place for figures on my own shelf. (You can put them where you wanna on yours.)

I'm was just saying above that mixing earth vehicles with video game Cybertronian mode vehicles doesn't look right.

Looking at the comics, I'm kinda hating on most of the IDW Designs from the RID series (Bumblebee in particular), though I'm liking most from MTMTE. I'm glad to see some 3rd party offerings based on those. Maybe Hasbro will follow.

And.... I think a lot of fans would disagree with you about G1 being "dead"... in fact, the upcoming Hasbro Masterpiece Soundwave **1980s cassette tape player** wants to have a few words with you.

But seriously, there's enough space in the fandom for fans of G1, Beast Wars, Kiss Play, IDW, FOC.. and fans who like them all. No need to start a war against the GeeWunners.

The games, from which the other IDW series continue, are based on the new Aligned G1. Rage of the Dinobots, Fall of Cybertron and Beast Hunters are the only IDW titles that belong to the same continuity.

ReGeneration One is, by definition, a continuation of the Marvel G1 comics.

Robots in Disguise and More Than Meets the Eye, with the Spotlights, are all part of a different IDW continuity, which started out in Infiltration - a reboot/reimagining of the first generation of Transformers on Earth.


So yes, it's not the same G1 as the first one, it's just a name given to the series.

Oh dear.

shockblast2 wrote:Why in the hell do you keep saying IDW is G1?

Because that's what their main comic continuity is. It's a G1 continuity. - http://tfwiki.net/wiki/IDW_Generation_1_continuity



That right there is totally a G1 continuity. Not "THE" G1 continuity, but one of many.

shockblast2 wrote:G1 is just that. G1 has not existed since 1990.

Then what would you call Dreamwave's non-Armada/non-Energon/non-Beast Wars/non-RiD comic continuity from 2002-2004?

shockblast2 wrote:The IDW version of Transformers goes hand in hand with FOC/WFC.

I'm sorry but I'm afraid you are greatly mistaken.

IDW has been publishing Transformers comics since 2005, five whole years before WFC ever even existed, and has been running steadily since then. But, not everything IDW has released has been part of a single continuity. The following is a list of all comic series released by IDW, and grouped together by continuity:

IDW Generation 1 Continuity:

• Infiltration
• Spotlight issues
• Stormbringer
• Escalation
• New Avengers/Transformers
• Megatron Origin
• Devastation
• Maximum Dinobots
• All Hail Megatron
• The Transformers (ongoing, 2009-2011)
• Bumblebee
• Last Stand of the Wreckers
• Ironhide
• Drift
• Infestation
• Heart of Darkness
• Chaos
• The Death of Optimus Prime
• More Than Meets The Eye
• Robots in Disguise - this is the one that has been borrowing WFC/FOC body designs
• Autocracy
• Monstrosity

Transformers: The Movie adaptation:

• Transformers: The Animated Movie

IDW Beast Wars Continuity:

• The Gathering
• The Ascending
• Beast Wars Sourcebook

Evolutions G1 Continuity:

• Hearts of Steel
• Infestation 2

Movie Continuity:

• Movie Prequel
• Target exclusive Movie prequels - "Planetfall" and "Interlude"
• Movie Adaptation
• The Reign of Starscream
• Saga of the AllSpark
• Alliance
• Defiance
• Revenge of the Fallen Official Movie Adaptation
• Tales of the Fallen
• Nefarious
• Sector 7
• Foundation
• Rising Storm
• Target exclusive Jazz, Space Case, Ratchet, Bumblebee, Arcee, and Starscream pack-in comics
• Dark of the Moon Movie Adaptation
• Convergence

Animated Continuity:

• Animated adaptation
• The Arrival
• The AllSpark Almanac
• The AllSpark Almanac II

Marvel Comics Continuity Continuation:

• Regeneration One

Aligned Continuity:

• War for Cybertron (one-shot)
• TF: Prime (graphic novel)
• TF: Prime adaptation
• Fall of Cybertron
• TF: Prime Rage of the Dinobots
• TF: Prime Beast Hunters

And of those lists, only the last one is in continuity with the WFC/FOC video games.

shockblast2 wrote:This is evident in the fact that they use each others designs.

Just because IDW's Robots in Disguise story borrows WFC/FOC designs doesn't put it in the Aligned Continuity. It also has Sky-Byte from the RiD cartoon as well, but that doesn't tie it to the RiD cartoon.



Otherwise, Monstrosity would have to be in Aligned as well because of this guy:

shockblast2 wrote:There is no story or spotlight on any story replicated from G1.

So? That's because it's a new G1. A different G1. There's more than one G1 continuity. Always have been, alwasy will be.

shockblast2 wrote:The fact that the dinobots and insecticons exist pre-earth should tip you off of this fact.

You do realize that there's far more to G1 than just its old cartoon, right?

shockblast2 wrote:And the fact bots like Springer and co appear.

See the resemblance?

With Springer, that is.

shockblast2 wrote:In G1, they did not come on the scene until season 3.

Yet again, there is far more to "G1" than just the cartoon.

shockblast2 wrote:As far as the new "thrilling 30" toys go, Blitzwing itself is DEFINITELY not g1. His face proves that.

Merely a borrowed design aspect integrated into the modern day Generation 1 character.

shockblast2 wrote:And I do not recall Springer towering over Ultra Magnus or even Optimus for that matter.

Hasbro simply hasn't yet made any toys of IDW G1 Optimus or Ultra Magnus that are to scale with the Springer toy.

Or, if one feels like it, they could use these toys:

shockblast2 wrote:Like I told the other guy, yes these are IDW figures.

Correct.

shockblast2 wrote:THEY ARE NOT G1. It is that simple.

Incorrect.

shockblast2 wrote:Geewun is dead and has been for two decades now.

The cartoon? Yes. The Marvel Comics? Yes. The Dreamwave comics? Yes (but only for about one decade). The IDW comics? NOPE!

There's also Wings Universe and All Spark that are still going on, both of which are G1 as well.

shockblast2 wrote:Move on. Live in the now.

No worries, man, as that's exactly what we're doing.

shockblast2 wrote:And now it is all about WFC/FOC/IDW.

And TF: Prime. And Rescue Bots. And IDW G1. And Wings Universe. And Beast Wars Shattered Glass. And All Spark. And Masterpiece. And Kre-O. And Bot Shots. And GT. And Go! And the hyping up of Transformers 4.

So, yeah, there's a whole lot more going on than just "WFC/FOC/IDW".

shockblast2 wrote:To the guy above that mentions Warpath, funny you mention him. I firmly believe that his Generations toy is a WFC figure. Before you go all nerd rage on me, consider this. Look at it. It looks almost identical to the WFC verison. More square than rounded like the video game, but definitely closer to the WFC than geewun. Adn before you give me that the pre 2012 Generations toys that were WFC said "cybertronian", consider Cliffjumpers figure did not and his is definitely WFC. And the fact that Warpaths alt mode says "cybertronian tank" in the description backs this up. It doesn't look like or say earth tank mode. As a matter of fact, the only geewun correlation it has it that it is a tank, its red, and it is called Warpath. So was the scout from the TFTM toyline. And that abomination was definitely not Warpath.

Thing is, though, Cliffjumper's toy came out when the "Cybertronian" ones were still being sold. Warpath, however, came out at the very end of the 2011 line, right when the Phase 2/ "Classics-style" toys were out and dominating the line.

Plus, you said so yourself. The toy is more square than rounded, which the WFC model was, whereas the G1 guy was definitely more square like the toy.

There's also the fact that, had Hasbro intended the Warpath toy to represent the WFC/FOC character, they pretty likely would have said so. Yet, they did not. Not at BotCon 2010 or 2011, not at SDCC 2010 or 2011, not at NYCC 2010 or 2011, nowhere.

With the way Warpath's toy differs from the WFC/FOC design moreso than the other WFC/FOC Generations toys, you'd need some pretty hard, irrefutable evidence (like an official say-so from Hasbro) to convince the fandom of it being a toy of the WFC/FOC character, as you would be in the minority on that one.

Also to note, TFWiki's article on Generations Warpath not only lists it as the original Generation One character, but describes it as a "combat tank of likely made-up origins", not one of Cybertronian origin.

Yeah, I don't see him as Cybertronian looking ... any more than Armada Megatron was.

gothsaurus wrote:I hope you don't think I'M the one believing IDW = G1. Far from it. Just chatting on the best place for figures on my own shelf. (You can put them where you wanna on yours.)

I'm was just saying above that mixing earth vehicles with video game Cybertronian mode vehicles doesn't look right.

Looking at the comics, I'm kinda hating on most of the IDW Designs from the RID series (Bumblebee in particular), though I'm liking most from MTMTE. I'm glad to see some 3rd party offerings based on those. Maybe Hasbro will follow.

And.... I think a lot of fans would disagree with you about G1 being "dead"... in fact, the upcoming Hasbro Masterpiece Soundwave **1980s cassette tape player** wants to have a few words with you.

But seriously, there's enough space in the fandom for fans of G1, Beast Wars, Kiss Play, IDW, FOC.. and fans who like them all. No need to start a war against the GeeWunners.

No, not you. Sorry, I should have been specific. Truth be told I like G1. Very much so. But, every time something like Hoist and Trailcutter come out you have this group of Hasbro haters that get PO'ed because they didn't do this or that right in their minds. When they fail to realize that these are a totally different creation all together. Just because they share a name or color does not mean they are automatically Classics, or Universe. Actually, the only pure G1 modern line, if there can be such a thing, is the Classics line, hence the title.
There is a whole mess of 3pt companies that cater to the fan with bottomless pockets that want G1 classics figures. They are all undeniably G1 related.
Besides that G1 is dead, with the exception of the few MP figures that get released every so often. And they are way overpriced.
And I after really taking a hard look at the Hoist/Trailcutter mold and design, the only thing missing from it being a "cybertronian" mode is some neon paint lines. True, they have the appearance of an earth truck, BUT a futuristic military vehicle at best. Definitely no truck you will see on the road.
Ultimately at the end of the day one will do whatever they want with their figures so i guess it is pointless to argue about it, right?

Banjo-Tron wrote:

shockblast2 wrote:Why in the hell do you keep saying IDW is G1?

Textbook Nerd Rage, right there.

That? That is nothing. You should come to my anti nerd rage meetings. Lets just say we have a LOT of relapses........

G1 isn't dead... at least.... not in my shriveled nostalgic curmudgeon heart.

Interesting point on Trailcutter seeming a bit modern and futuristic for a normal truck... but still. No crazy flat FOC hubcaps, hexagonal grid graphics, or energon glowing bits...

BUT I wonder how he'd pass for FOC if you added some. *calls Reprolabels hotline on red 1970s phone with a springy cord*

A big indicator of Trailcutter not being a WFC/FOC toy is that his toy wasn't based on any design made by High Moon Studios.

Nor were Warpath or Springer.