Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

News Credits: 436 · by **Sabrblade** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:36 am

chuckdawg1999 wrote:Marvel G1 Comics, they were on the ark with the other Autobots and awoken by teletran-1 to stop Shockwave.

Yet ,this take place on Cybertron still and the Dinobots already have their dino altmodes, which the Marvel G1 versions didn't get until arriving on Earth.

chuckdawg1999 wrote:Poor WFC doesn't fit in anywhere. Has to eat his lunch with the janitor at school.

It fits with Prime, more or less.

Shadowman wrote:Aligned is a about as much of a mess as G1 was. WfC/FoC, Exodus/Exiles, and TFP all barely fit in with each other. I'll chalk it up to miscommunication, the people working on all three pieces not working together. They've only recently been patching it all together, like Ratchet retelling bits of Exodus in TFP, or FoC Cliffjumper integrating parts of his TFP design.

I wouldn't necessarily say "barely". The mai nreason it's hard to see them fit together is due to people not wanting to.

lowman_x wrote:It definitely feels like putting WFC within the TF:Prime continuity was an after thought. I remember reading promo material about WFC (well before TF Prime had even been mentioned) saying how we would, for the first time, get the true history of the Transformers before they came to Earth. We would get the chance to experience the TF civil war. It all alluded to being the beginnings of the G1 continuity.

Those are some pretty vague word if they didn't specify G1.

Plus, this interview with Matt Tieger and Aaron Archer from 12/18/2009 (a whole six months before WFC was released), it was said that the game would serve as the foundation of and the start of "the latest, and possibly last, Generation."

lowman_x wrote:I also don't believe that the character designs were just meant to be homages to G1 characters - I honestly believe that this was meant to be an updated retelling of the G1 continuity (like IDW did with the "-ation" series) and that's what the designers went into the game basing it on - "We're doing G1! Booyah!".

But like shaodwman said, several designs from Animated were more G1-esque than those of WFC, yet we don't consider animated to be a re-imagining of G1.

lowman_x wrote:THEN I think Hasbro came in (after the game had started to be made)and went: "Well, we're starting a new continuity called TF: Prime which is kinda a cross of Bayverse, G1 and a bit of Animated and we really want to market that... so... we're going to say that everything from here on out is in that continuity. Oh, and that game you've been working on and obviously basing on G1? Yeah, that's now Prime continuity too. Anyone got a sturdy shoehorn? You're gonna need it. Any sequels? Yeah, you're gonna have to start throwing in obvious TF; Prime stuff for those." (Like Cliffjumper's head design in the latest promo stuff.)

I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.

I'd think they would be a little more professional than that. The reason for all the diversities is due to Hasbro giving enough leeway to serve the stories of each.

by **SirSoundwaveIV** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 9:12 am

Why do people CONSTANTLY deny WFC is part of (and the base of) the aligned continuity? Even the videos they ran of it at gamestops mentioned that WFC was going to be the base of the Aligned continuity. (they didn't specify it was aligned obv. but they did specify the new continuity gig)

Just :BOOM:

by **BLUDGEON** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:27 am

lowman_x wrote:It definitely feels like putting WFC within the TF:Prime continuity was an after thought. I remember reading promo material about WFC (well before TF Prime had even been mentioned) saying how we would, for the first time, get the true history of the Transformers before they came to Earth. We would get the chance to experience the TF civil war. It all alluded to being the beginnings of the G1 continuity. I also don't believe that the character designs were just meant to be homages to G1 characters - I honestly believe that this was meant to be an updated retelling of the G1 continuity (like IDW did with the "-ation" series) and that's what the designers went into the game basing it on - "We're doing G1! Booyah!".

THEN I think Hasbro came in (after the game had started to be made)and went: "Well, we're starting a new continuity called TF: Prime which is kinda a cross of Bayverse, G1 and a bit of Animated and we really want to market that... so... we're going to say that everything from here on out is in that continuity. Oh, and that game you've been working on and obviously basing on G1? Yeah, that's now Prime continuity too. Anyone got a sturdy shoehorn? You're gonna need it. Any sequels? Yeah, you're gonna have to start throwing in obvious TF; Prime stuff for those." (Like Cliffjumper's head design in the latest promo stuff.)

Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.

by **BLUDGEON** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:28 am

lowman_x wrote:It definitely feels like putting WFC within the TF:Prime continuity was an after thought. I remember reading promo material about WFC (well before TF Prime had even been mentioned) saying how we would, for the first time, get the true history of the Transformers before they came to Earth. We would get the chance to experience the TF civil war. It all alluded to being the beginnings of the G1 continuity. I also don't believe that the character designs were just meant to be homages to G1 characters - I honestly believe that this was meant to be an updated retelling of the G1 continuity (like IDW did with the "-ation" series) and that's what the designers went into the game basing it on - "We're doing G1! Booyah!".

THEN I think Hasbro came in (after the game had started to be made)and went: "Well, we're starting a new continuity called TF: Prime which is kinda a cross of Bayverse, G1 and a bit of Animated and we really want to market that... so... we're going to say that everything from here on out is in that continuity. Oh, and that game you've been working on and obviously basing on G1? Yeah, that's now Prime continuity too. Anyone got a sturdy shoehorn? You're gonna need it. Any sequels? Yeah, you're gonna have to start throwing in obvious TF; Prime stuff for those." (Like Cliffjumper's head design in the latest promo stuff.)

Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.

News Credits: 436 · by **Sabrblade** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:32 am

BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.

Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

News Credits: 1 · by **Wigglez** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:02 pm

Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

News Credits: 436 · by **Sabrblade** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:05 pm

wigglez323 wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

Lemme see.

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:16 pm

wigglez323 wrote:All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

That's no reason to assume it was true.

News Credits: 1 · by **Wigglez** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:01 pm

Shadowman wrote:
wigglez323 wrote:All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

That's no reason to assume it was true.

Yeah. It's kinda clear that there was some false advertising in there. Especially the customizations on multiplayer

News Credits: 5749 · by **El Duque** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:19 pm

gameinformer has posted a couple of interviews with Transformers: Fall of Cybertron game director Matt Tieger. Click here to view the interviews.

Matt Tieger has to direct Optimus Prime. He has to direct the player's experience and he has to direct High Moon Studios as they work on Transformers: Fall of Cybertron. While technically a sequel to 2010's War for Cybertron, due to some radical changes in story structure and gameplay, Matt Tieger prefers to call Fall of Cybertron a spiritual successor. We had a chance to sit down the game's director to talk about his history in the gaming industry and what it is like to be a key player in one of the largest franchises in entertainment.

by **Dinoswipe** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:21 pm

i got my gameinformer today. should i post scans up or what?

by **BLUDGEON** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:32 pm

wigglez323 wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

Yeah, they said it was based on/around G1

News Credits: 436 · by **Sabrblade** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:34 pm

BLUDGEON wrote:
wigglez323 wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

Yeah, they said it was based on/around G1

Like I said, show me. I want to see them.

by **prowl123** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:42 pm

Just recieved this mon'th's gameinformer, and the featured article if FOC.

We have Vortex, Grimlock, Megatron, Optimus, Cliffjumper, and Jazz shown.

News Credits: 436 · by **Sabrblade** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:47 pm

prowl123 wrote:Just recieved this mon'th's gameinformer, and the featured article if FOC.

We have Vortex, Grimlock, Megatron, Optimus, Cliffjumper, and Jazz shown.

Aside from OP, Grimlock, and CJ, does anyone else look different from WFC?

by **prowl123** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:51 pm

Sabrblade wrote:
prowl123 wrote:Just recieved this mon'th's gameinformer, and the featured article if FOC.

We have Vortex, Grimlock, Megatron, Optimus, Cliffjumper, and Jazz shown.
Aside from OP, Grimlock, and CJ, does anyone else look different from WFC?

Megatron is VERY different. Will get a pic soon.

Hell, I'll do it now.

AlL hAiL MEgAtRoN!

News Credits: 6 · by **TulioDude** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:24 pm

Sounds cool.

by **BLUDGEON** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:37 pm

Sabrblade wrote:
wigglez323 wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC
Lemme see.

'We went back to G1.. that was the cornerstone of everything we did...'

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/ ... ron/18531/

Watch the video..

News Credits: 1 · by **Wigglez** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:39 pm

Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:
wigglez323 wrote:
Sabrblade wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:Agreed, thats what I pretty much thought when I heard about it being linked to TF Prime. I dont know why they couldn't just let it be its own thing. It would have allowed them to make another seperate toy line. They probably think kids might get confused. I think they underestimate children..
I think that's where the main confusion is coming from because, even though we're being told the game is not G1 continuity, I think it's obvious enough that it was originally meant to be.
Aside from the homages to G1, what surefire evidence do we have to say that it was originally intended to be a G1 game, exactly?

All the interview videos with Tieger about WFC

Yeah, they said it was based on/around G1
Like I said, show me. I want to see them.

You can't look things up yourself?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhM5mVAc ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMVRSgroFRg
Not to mention the character designs.

by **BLUDGEON** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:50 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhM5mVAc ... re=related

At 1:51....

*High fives Wigglez323*

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:53 pm

BLUDGEON wrote:'We went back to G1.. that was the cornerstone of everything we did...'

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/ ... ron/18531/

Watch the video..

It says they used it as a basis, not that it's set in G1. All TF series use G1 as a basis.

EDIT:

BLUDGEON wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhM5mVAc3QE&feature=related

At 1:51....

*High fives Wigglez323*

At Toy Fair 2010, two months before that, Hasbro reps said WfC was part of TF:P's continuity.

News Credits: 1 · by **Wigglez** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:03 pm

Shadowman wrote:
BLUDGEON wrote:'We went back to G1.. that was the cornerstone of everything we did...'

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/ ... ron/18531/

Watch the video..

It says they used it as a basis, not that it's set in G1. All TF series use G1 as a basis.

We've found proof. And you still deny it. Whatever, that doesn't matter. What matters is this game is going to be better than WFC. I'm starting to say that it doesn't matter what cartoon the game belongs to. This is just what happens before they came to Earth.

News Credits: 3 · by **NatsumeRyu** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:06 pm

Concept art of Perceptor above and to the left of HMS logo in the Tieger interviews.

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:20 pm

wigglez323 wrote:We've found proof. And you still deny it.

Hasbro denied it months before any of those clips.

News Credits: 18 · by **Fires_Of_Inferno** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:22 pm

This post may contain Transformers: Prime spoilers, so don't read any further if you don't want them to be spoiled. Also, I dunno how to black out my text so yeah.

In TF: Prime, they say that Megatron was a Gladiator and that Optimus admired him for his revolutionist thinking, and that Optimus was chosen to be Prime over Megatron. But none of that is mentioned in War For Cybertron. If they're trying to tie the continuities together, then they're leaving a few holes in the story. I understand that it can't be perfect, but I'm just nit-picky I guess.