Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

The whole "Transformers VS Go-bots" thing. Can't we all just get along?

BeastProwl wrote:The whole "Transformers VS Go-bots" thing. Can't we all just get along?

In contrast to this, the TCC once published a big prose story that focused alsmost entirely on six GoBots, and portrayed all of them in a positive light in relation to the TFs (well, all except for one of them, who kind of turned on the other five).

I have heard people call Barricade 'Barrage.'. Is that even a word?

prowl123 wrote:I have heard people call Barricade 'Barrage.'. Is that even a word?

Yup

Dagon wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Burn wrote:Now can we get off the debate of the last few pages and onto something new that irks people?

If going off topic irks you, then technically we've been on-topic this whole time. Thus, it shouldn't irk you.

Also, tying in with what Dagon said, when people try to use their own fanfic elements against official canon. I can "interpret" the sky is purple, that doesn't make it so.

That's very true. But, We are dealing with a fictional universe, and so if one were to create their own fanfic-based version of that universe, it doesn't do any harm. Provided that fanfic universe is not forced on the actual canon one. In my own personal view of any fictional universe, so long as I don't make you or anyone else adhere to the rules I've self-invented, I'm hardly harming anyone.
If my fanmode Shockwave is irrational and stupid, that's really ok, because I'm not making you or anyone else play by my fanmode Shockwave.
I'm familiar with Transformers official canon. And I have my own things. And somehow, magically, I've been able to keep them separate and not apply my fanon to the official version that is accepted by all people.
In a fictional universe, I can indeed "interpret" the sky to be purple, and it really makes no difference so long as I keep it to myself. Because it's a fictional universe.

I mean, when people bring their own fanfic elements into a discussion about official canon, or worse, when they believe their own fanfic elements are equally valid to the official canon. Which you haven't done, actually.

craggy wrote:just a heads up guys, but sometimes the sky is purple.

Crap. I tried to go with a color on the spectrum the sky doesn't turn, a few colors came up before I settled on purple. I really should have picked something other than the sky...

prowl123 wrote:I have heard people call Barricade 'Barrage.'. Is that even a word?

Barrage? Yes, it's a word. It means to hit something quickly and repeatedly.

Shadowman wrote:

Nemesis Maximo wrote:

Shadowman wrote:(T)he Empire is straight-up evil. They blew up an entire planet just to prove that they could.

But to each his own. I mean, this this case, your own is provably wrong but hey, whatevs.

EDIT: An entire inhabited planet. A couple billion people living there. All just because the Empire wanted to prove a point.

Rebel scum!

Uh...yeah, the Rebel base wasn't there.

I was calling you scum, Rebel sympathizer! by the way, it's only a movie.

Anyway, it bugs me when people say that one of the Insecticons turns into either Cyclonus or Scourge during TF:TM rather than Skywarp or Thundercracker. I know it's all rather sketchy, but still.

Nemesis Maximo wrote:
Anyway, it bugs me when people say that one of the Insecticons turns into either Cyclonus or Scourge during TF:TM rather than Skywarp or Thundercracker. I know it's all rather sketchy, but still.

So.........telling you a solid fact bothers you??

ok so lets see, 2+2=4.......does that fact bug you as well?

the issue is not "sketchy" in any way.
the Insecticon named Bombshell was indeed, the one that became Cyclonus.

Its what was seen and said in the film.its also seen and written in the storyboards.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Nemesis Maximo wrote:
Anyway, it bugs me when people say that one of the Insecticons turns into either Cyclonus or Scourge during TF:TM rather than Skywarp or Thundercracker. I know it's all rather sketchy, but still.

So.........telling you a solid fact bothers you??

ok so lets see, 2+2=4.......does that fact bug you as well?

the issue is not "sketchy" in any way.
the Insecticon named Bombshell was indeed, the one that became Cyclonus.

Its what was seen and said in the film.its also seen and written in the storyboards.

You've bothered me. I am now bothered.

It is sketchy. Here's a link: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Cyclonus_(G1)#Who_is_Cyclonus.3F

It is not a solid fact. Bombshell may have been named on the storyboard, but it is never explicitly said, in the film, who becomes Cyclonus. There have also been other official sources who say Skywarp is Cyclonus, and vise versa. The division is almost 50/50.

"Two plus two is chicken!"

Skywarp would be a nicer fit for Cyclonus, IMO. I think that the Insecticon thing holds slightly more water though unfortunately. But really that scene in the movie has to be taken with a big pinch of salt because there are 2 Cyclonii(?) 1 of which is never seen again.

Nemesis Maximo wrote:You've bothered me. I am now bothered.

It is sketchy. Here's a link: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Cyclonus_(G1)#Who_is_Cyclonus.3F

It is not a solid fact. Bombshell may have been named on the storyboard, but it is never explicitly said, in the film, who becomes Cyclonus. There have also been other official sources who say Skywarp is Cyclonus, and vise versa. The division is almost 50/50.

"Two plus two is chicken!"

Its a shame I'm bothering you, but you are indeed denying a simple common practice of story telling.

A] its a common practice of story telling to introduce characters in a logical manner.And thats either in the forefront ,from left to right or from center screen to back ground.

When Scourge was named , the center screen/fore fronted character was Scourge, the 2 in the back Sweeps

When Cyclonus was named, the fore fronted to the left character becomes Cyclonus, the one in the background,to the right becomes the "Armada".

B] the story board prove the writers intent that it be Bombshell.Now I dont think they really cared who became who, maybe they just picked a name out of a hat....but that name was Bombshell...not Skywarp.

C]as far as I know, the only sources who say Skywarp is Cyclonus is from either Japanese products [which makes some sense to me since they read right to left] or the comic that came with the Australian/UK DVD release.

We know the Japanese continuity is far different then the one from Hasbro so I see no relevant issue here.

And to date, as far as I know, no one considers the Dinobot combiner official or canon, so why would anything else from the Australian/UK DVD comic be called official/canon?

The official Hasbro followup comics, The 4 part[?] Universe Wreakers comic from 3H says Cyclonus was Bombshell

The IDW anniversary adaptation of the 86 film says Cyclonus was Bombshell

If you know of any Hasbro source thast says Cyclonus was Skywarp, please post it.because I see nothing that indicates a 50/50 split from any Hasbro source.

Banjo-Tron wrote:Skywarp would be a nicer fit for Cyclonus, IMO. I think that the Insecticon thing holds slightly more water though unfortunately. But really that scene in the movie has to be taken with a big pinch of salt because there are 2 Cyclonii(?) 1 of which is never seen again.

actually, the other "Cyclonus" was seen again in the film durring the Autobot city escape battle, and in season 3.

I was not really bothered, just goofin. But in any event, Sto-Vo-Kor, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I will concede to your point, though - it isn't split 50/50.

Nemesis Maximo wrote:I was not really bothered, just goofin. But in any event, Sto-Vo-Kor, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I will concede to your point, though - it isn't split 50/50.

I was messing with you asc well.Just trying to have a bit of fun.

It bugs me that the comics aren't top 10 books right now. Not only are they the best TF comics ever, but they're some of the best books on the stands, period. Seriously, James Roberts and Alex Milne should winningg Eisner's. I nominated them for Harvey awards, but nothing came of it. TF comics get dismissed by the rest of the industry because they're licensed books based on '80's toys, as if that somehow makes them any sillier or less valid than Spider-Man or Superman.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:When people think the G1 cartoon was the first piece of Transformers fiction ever, coming before all else and pretty being the foundation on which all post-1980's TF fiction was inspired by.

this bugs me too

PRIMUS!!! You don't know how tired I am of this occurring.

This is gonna tick some people off but,

What irks me the most is...

Is the fact that there are people out there that believe Transformers The Movie is without ANY FLAWS and that the live action movies are nothing but flaws. Now, I'm highly aware that these statements could merely be peoples' opinions, but these specific groups of people I'm talking about are literally trying to pass their opinions off as FACTS. (Now these people I encounter EVERYWHERE in life, whether it be on the internet or outside in life, but that rant is for another time.) Now, I'm not saying any of you fall into this category of people, (if you do, expect a visit from me in your dreams .) but there are people out there that are like this and I just wanted to point it out.

Also, Geewunners. (I love G1 too, but it's not the be all-end all of Transformers...that comes later. )

Slashercon wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:When people think the G1 cartoon was the first piece of Transformers fiction ever, coming before all else and pretty being the foundation on which all post-1980's TF fiction was inspired by.

this bugs me too

PRIMUS!!! You don't know how tired I am of this occurring.

But...the CARTOON is the almighty! It is the FOUNDATION!

J/K. But I would agree that all post-80s fiction is is inspired by it. It had a wider audience than the comic. Name 1 series that doesn't take SOME cue from the cartoon.

Nemesis Maximo wrote:

Slashercon wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:When people think the G1 cartoon was the first piece of Transformers fiction ever, coming before all else and pretty being the foundation on which all post-1980's TF fiction was inspired by.

this bugs me too

PRIMUS!!! You don't know how tired I am of this occurring.

But...the CARTOON is the almighty! It is the FOUNDATION!

J/K. But I would agree that all post-80s fiction is is inspired by it. It had a wider audience than the comic. Name 1 series that doesn't take SOME cue from the cartoon.

Transformers: Go-Bots.

Sabrblade wrote:

Nemesis Maximo wrote:

Slashercon wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:When people think the G1 cartoon was the first piece of Transformers fiction ever, coming before all else and pretty being the foundation on which all post-1980's TF fiction was inspired by.

this bugs me too

PRIMUS!!! You don't know how tired I am of this occurring.

But...the CARTOON is the almighty! It is the FOUNDATION!

J/K. But I would agree that all post-80s fiction is is inspired by it. It had a wider audience than the comic. Name 1 series that doesn't take SOME cue from the cartoon.

Transformers: Go-Bots.

Dammit.

I want to first point out I have OCD very severely to where I have to correct someone right in their tracks or it bugs me to death. I get the nagging need to bitch slap a 10 year old who had just seen the intro to Cybertron and keeps calling Hot Shot Jazz or Optimus Prime. I also hate it with a burning passion when people dont get the transform right on a figure so simple like G1 Cliffjumper and yet the can transform ROTF Long Haul just fine. DaFuq?

A couple new ones pertaining to the Rescue Bots cartoon:

1. When people call it "Rescue Heroes".

2. When people consider it a preschool show just because its toyline is for preschoolers and because it doesn't have Decepticons/a war/an ongoing struggle between good and evil/etc. You don't need those things to tell a good story or have well written characters. Think of all the cartoons we've had on Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network back in the 90s and early-to-mid 2000s that were not war-based but were still immensely enjoyable. This show is a lot like that, being too intelligently written and not patronizing enough (or even at all) to be aimed primarily at those still learning their ABCs. There is a difference between being "kiddie" and being "smart but safe enough for all ages to enjoy". Batman: The Animated Series is just one such example of a show that was written intelligently yet was also kept safe enough for children to watch (though, not as young children as Rescue Bots permits, but children nonetheless).

Slashercon wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:When people think the G1 cartoon was the first piece of Transformers fiction ever, coming before all else and pretty being the foundation on which all post-1980's TF fiction was inspired by.

Yeah, me to.

Sabrblade wrote:When people consider it a preschool show just because its toyline is for preschoolers and because it doesn't have Decepticons/a war/an ongoing struggle between good and evil/etc.

They think it's a preschool show because it's intentionally aimed at preschoolers.

Fanon that irks me:

Jetfire and Starscream are lovers in EVERY continuity.
EVERYTHING Wheeljack makes explodes
Ratchet is a raging, wrench-throwing psychopath
Sunstreaker and Sideswipe are always twins (also always lovers)
Prowl and Jazz always lovers and any other ship is heresy.
Thundercracker is a weak weepy seeker who needs Skywarp to protect him.
Megatron and Starscream are married.

NON Fanon things that irk me:

Prime's Rib!
IDW Arcee's origin story
MIKE COSTA and his Gary Stu Spike Witwicky.

CC, been in this fandom too long?

cybercat wrote:Megatron and Starscream are married.

Oh dear God I forgot about that. Anyone who considers what Megatron and Starscream have going to be "love" has a really messed-up definition of the word.