Submit News Contact Us Translate Sign in Join

ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions

Transformers News: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions

Friday, April 17th, 2009 12:24AM CDT

Category: Toy News
Posted by: Counterpunch   Views: 18,022

Topic Options: View Discussion · Sign in or Join to reply

Want a sneak peak at the upcoming RotF Mixmaster toy's transformation sequence? Take a look at the instructions as provided by member s250 and satisfy that curiosity...

ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions

ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions

ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions
Credit(s): s250, www.tf08.com
Search Got Transformers News? Let us know here!
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911303)
Posted by Bumblebeast on April 17th, 2009 @ 12:31am CDT
Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911306)
Posted by Mechas8n on April 17th, 2009 @ 12:34am CDT
Quadruple changer!? Nice Well, the toy is only triple, but with all those modes I am disappointed that there's no "Devastators bonce" mode.

Big freaking hands!
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911307)
Posted by Megatron Wolf on April 17th, 2009 @ 12:35am CDT
Cool transformation, and a tankish looking mode....... ok im sold. Now i need to think of name for it. Damn im running out. Last movie took most of em.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911314)
Posted by Serpent O - R on April 17th, 2009 @ 1:11am CDT
Bumblebeast wrote:Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.


I absolutely agree... and with Devastator's Fist.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911318)
Posted by dabattousai on April 17th, 2009 @ 1:35am CDT
Bumblebeast wrote:Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.



My thoughts exactly....
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911330)
Posted by Ultra Markus on April 17th, 2009 @ 3:21am CDT
you have to buy all the constucticons separately for the individual robots and then the set that just forms devastator so you pay twice for all the contructicons if you want both devastator and the individual robots that form him funny how that all works out
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911343)
Posted by Street-Convoy S0S on April 17th, 2009 @ 4:15am CDT
I wonder if its just one construction who has the whole instructions on making devistator. cuss he looks easy to make the face.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911351)
Posted by Autobot032 on April 17th, 2009 @ 4:43am CDT
Ultra Markus wrote:you have to buy all the constucticons separately for the individual robots and then the set that just forms devastator so you pay twice for all the contructicons if you want both devastator and the individual robots that form him funny how that all works out


Isn't it?

This actually angers me, because they flat out lied to us. They said something would be sacrificed in either Devastator, or the individuals if they had to combine, so they came up with both sets. Well that's not even remotely true, now that we see his instructions. If they can make a Jackhammer mode for Rampage, and weapons tank mode for Mixmaster (that's TWO triplechangers so far...) then they most certainly could've made them combine.

Scrap the stupid third modes and make them combine. Geez. What a friggin' rip off.

Ya know, I'd have respected them far more if they had said "Look, we want to cash in, so there will be two versions of the Constructicons. Hey, at least we're honest."

We got a bunch of spin and dodged questions.

How friggin' rude.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911358)
Posted by harvester on April 17th, 2009 @ 5:56am CDT
Autobot032 wrote:If they can make a Jackhammer mode for Rampage, and weapons tank mode for Mixmaster (that's TWO triplechangers so far...) then they most certainly could've made them combine.


Im starting to have a new theory based on the toys, probably not going to happen but fits with what they're trying to pull;

Devastator is one thing, one spark in the beginning, he's 6 [or 7] construction vehicles combined. That's the first toy set. Somehow he/his spark gets dispersed into separate sparks [hoping the twins sacrifice themselves in the beginning to do so], then becoming separate entities/bots, those toys being the individual constructicons like this with an odd third mode.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911368)
Posted by Hard Hacker on April 17th, 2009 @ 7:48am CDT
I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911371)
Posted by El Duque on April 17th, 2009 @ 7:59am CDT
Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)


Forget the kids give me a proper Devastator! :twisted:
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911376)
Posted by Counterpunch on April 17th, 2009 @ 8:07am CDT
Where were you guys yesterday when I was getting kicked in the balls for suggesting that we should be getting a full 3 mode set of Constructicons?

Teamwork people! Teamwork!
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911381)
Posted by Bumblebeast on April 17th, 2009 @ 8:23am CDT
Anyways, I hope that a third party comes up with a clever form to make them combine. I'll probably get the individual constructicons, but not that Voltron thing.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911383)
Posted by Wheeljack144 on April 17th, 2009 @ 8:36am CDT
Jackhammer mode is all sorts of stupid, but this battle mode looks pretty cool. Demolisher's motorcycle mode as decent too, but I would prefer if he had legs.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911411)
Posted by Warbreaker on April 17th, 2009 @ 10:12am CDT
Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)


Nicely put together! Some people just can't seem to get around the fact that Hasbro wasn't created to purely satisfy the wants of adult collectors, otherwise it would have run into the ground of bankruptcy a long time ago. Of course it tries to fulfill some of our wishes, but the decisions it chooses, for better or for worse, are ultimately it's own to choose, not ours.

Well, that nice cross-sectional view of Mixmaster's cement barrel (panel 4) automatically disproves any hint/capability of a vacuum maw. I'm not staring too deeply at the instructions, this stuff is serious joy-killing spoilers for me. I...like his third mode? It's a cool turret, what with the appropriately-placed cement-barrel parts acting as shields and the BFG poking out in the middle, but it's not a really a selling point in my eyes (it seems to consist of his bot-mode doing yoga in the instructions), since the robot mode and alt-mode are still extremely awesome, I consider it to be some sort of 'bonus' mode like Energon Scorponok's 'jet' mode. Seems to me that his BFG can only be swung over his head with some difficulty, so it's a bit of a letdown. Ah well, I still like Bonecrusher v2.0 plenty.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911421)
Posted by El Duque on April 17th, 2009 @ 10:35am CDT
Seriously what kid in their right mind would want a Devastator set with three full modes :roll:

I just don't buy the arguement that we aren't getting a combining Devy with individual transformable figures is because these are meant for kids. Would it be complex? I'm sure it would be, but so are a lot of the figures that have been marketed to kids. If I were a kid right now I would still be pissed about this. I don't even like kids, but I will give them enough credit that they can handle a full three mode Devy.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911442)
Posted by Autobot032 on April 17th, 2009 @ 11:26am CDT
harvester wrote:
Autobot032 wrote:If they can make a Jackhammer mode for Rampage, and weapons tank mode for Mixmaster (that's TWO triplechangers so far...) then they most certainly could've made them combine.


Im starting to have a new theory based on the toys, probably not going to happen but fits with what they're trying to pull;

Devastator is one thing, one spark in the beginning, he's 6 [or 7] construction vehicles combined. That's the first toy set. Somehow he/his spark gets dispersed into separate sparks [hoping the twins sacrifice themselves in the beginning to do so], then becoming separate entities/bots, those toys being the individual constructicons like this with an odd third mode.


Not a bad idea, but not the one we're getting. Devastator appears at the end of the film, atop the Pyramids in Giza. You see Demolishor in robot mode (alone) in the opening sequence in China.

So, they start out separate and then combine towards the end.

Not a bad idea though, seriously.

Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)


Unreasonable? US? Are you serious? What the... NO! We're not being unreasonable!

The toys are already complex enough as is. (Mixmaster's instructions actually gave me a bit of a headache...) Gut the the third mode, and in it's place make a combiner connection. Same amount of difficulty as is right now, but with the ability to combine. How is that asking too much of them? I think you're missing the point there.

You want to know what's really unreasonable?

Paying $99.50 for a transforming set of figures that don't combine.
Plus another $100.00 for a set that does, but has no individual robot modes.

$199.50 to have the ultimate set of ROTF Constructicons is absolutely, without a doubt, 110% unreasonable. You talk about figure difficulty for kids, well what about affordability problems for kids?

With the economy as it is right now, most kids won't be able to afford more than two figures (or one Voyager), parents certainly won't be willing to shell out more, and even some of us have cut down our TF spending.

That's unreasonable. Asking for an intricate combiner (when we know they've had the technology for years) is not only reasonable, it's fiscally responsible. (And I say that with a straight face, because it's true.)

Hasbro went beyond reason a long time ago. This is just icing on the cake.

Oh and btw...kids are going to want a set of Constructions that form Devastator just as much as we do, and when they figure out the Devastator they bought is nothing more than a glorified Megazord, when the film creation was the six robots, they're not only going to be confused, but they're gonna be pissed.

Don't dumb kids down, they're far smarter and more capable than you give them credit for. I've seen kids take Rubik's Cube-esque TFs and figure out how to transform them no problem.

Unreasonable? Right.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911447)
Posted by El Duque on April 17th, 2009 @ 11:51am CDT
Good points!
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911478)
Posted by starfish on April 17th, 2009 @ 1:52pm CDT
I'm on the side of Hasbro here. I mean, look at the engineering on that thing; it's an intricate transformation to be sure. How the hell are Hasbro supposed to stash Devastator's face in there as well, given that the mixer barrel unfolds in at least six different directions already?

Demolishor has the same problem. He transforms into a spindly, ungainly robot that's all arms and wheels. The other version (with no robot mode) unfolds in all sorts of other different ways to form a solid torso.

I know Hasbro are usually really good at designing great transformations, but they can't pull a genie out of a bottle. There's simply no way on earth you can get those body parts AND a movie-accurate robot mode out of the same toy, especially if you want Devastator to have some kind of articulation as well.

Given the above, I think that Hasbro's solution is a rather elegant and clever compromise.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911582)
Posted by doomseer on April 17th, 2009 @ 5:58pm CDT
If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?

They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners. Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.

'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.

Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911595)
Posted by Autobot032 on April 17th, 2009 @ 6:42pm CDT
doomseer wrote:If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?


Thank you for an excellent point. Awesome.

doomseer wrote:They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners. Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.


Exactly. Again, awesome.

doomseer wrote:'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.


Exactly. This is an excellent point, and thank you for the informative lesson on the toys there. I had no idea they were marketed at a teenager. Oh and again, awesome.

doomseer wrote:Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!


YES, YES, a million times YES. Thank you! This is all about making some money and putting the screws to us. They've killed Universe 2.0, and put Animated on a very limited release this year to bring in ROTF and a good portion of the figures aren't even accepted by hardcore fans. Yet they're making TWO of the same character to the tune of $200.00 and people of all ages are expected to fork over for it.

That's highway robbery, and it's been their plan all along. I can't wait for some 3rd party company like Fanprojects (or whatever it's called) to make a combiner accessory set that allows the current figures to combine like the official "Megazord kit" coming in August from Hasbro.

Your entire post was made of win.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911597)
Posted by El Duque on April 17th, 2009 @ 6:50pm CDT
While it would be great if some third party company made a kit that would allow the individual figures to combine I doubt it happens. You can bet as soon as these get released kit-bashers will get right to work using both sets to make a working version that transformers and combines.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911728)
Posted by WarzoneBeta on April 18th, 2009 @ 2:45am CDT
umm... guys i just found out something the weapons combine i think i just was looking at the pics and i can see a connection in a combined cybertronian vehical form... i think we'll be getting devys alt mode with these figures i kid you not look at the figs very closely all we need now is to see the other figs and then ill know.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911769)
Posted by starfish on April 18th, 2009 @ 5:11am CDT
doomseer wrote:If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?


Thay managed it in the 80s, because times were simpler then. "Fold the wings back and insert robot hand into post" is probably not a transformation that would be acceptable in today's more complex toy market.

doomseer wrote:They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners.


As I've said in other posts already, I completely agree on this point. I'm sure that if Hasbro gor their brains in gear, with today's technology they could make the most kick-ass combiner ever seen.

The problem, however, is in making a combiner that matches what we see on screen. When Hasbro were designing Landfill or Superion Maximus, they had complete design freedom, and as such we were rewarded with some pretty cool toys (although Landfill, to be fair, wasn't very stable or articulated).

It's all very well Hasbro making a good combiner toy - but it's a whole nother matter to make something that both functions as a toy AND matches the CGI characters we see on-screen.

doomseer wrote:Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.


Aparrently, this combiniation is nothing more technical than Prime wearing Jetfire as a backpack. If you think that's complicated, then I hope you had fun with your Action Masters.

doomseer wrote:'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.

Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!


Firstly, what the hell's wrong with that? I mean, they are a company aren't they? They exist to make profits, don't they? So what is exactly is your beef with Hasbro trying to make profits by selling toys?

Besides, as I've said before, I personally think that Hasbro would have made a fully-functioning set of Combiners if it were possible. Given the technical demands of a screen-accurate Devastator, I think Hasbro's decision is a good compromise.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911779)
Posted by Autobot032 on April 18th, 2009 @ 6:03am CDT
starfish wrote:
doomseer wrote:If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?


Thay managed it in the 80s, because times were simpler then. "Fold the wings back and insert robot hand into post" is probably not a transformation that would be acceptable in today's more complex toy market.


True, but look at the Energon Combiners, or JRX/Railracer, or Magnaboss, or Tripredacus. Intricate transformations (especially on the last two in terms of getting it from robot mode to combined mode) Far more intricate than folding a piece here and there, yet they were able to make them combine.

Why now, when the technology is readily available, do they take a step back? It's not a design issue, it's a money issue. (I.E. let's make more.)

starfish wrote:
doomseer wrote:They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners.


As I've said in other posts already, I completely agree on this point. I'm sure that if Hasbro gor their brains in gear, with today's technology they could make the most kick-ass combiner ever seen.

The problem, however, is in making a combiner that matches what we see on screen. When Hasbro were designing Landfill or Superion Maximus, they had complete design freedom, and as such we were rewarded with some pretty cool toys (although Landfill, to be fair, wasn't very stable or articulated).

It's all very well Hasbro making a good combiner toy - but it's a whole nother matter to make something that both functions as a toy AND matches the CGI characters we see on-screen.


But they HAVE done that. Haven't you looked at the pictures of Leader Class Optimus Prime? Or watched Peaugh's review on YouTube?

He's intricate, he's CGI accurate (with a small percentage of cheating), and he even has the Mech Alive gimmick working as well.

If they can do that with him, they can do it with the other figures. Why they haven't done so with Megatron is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, I'll buy him because I like the figure (I really do), but even I'll admit it has quite a few shortcomings and it's not the best work, they could've done more.

After seeing Prime, I now know that Hasbro is capable of incredible feats (along with Takara since this is a joint operation), there's no excuse for a two set system to have the "complete" Constructicons. Again...money.

starfish wrote:
doomseer wrote:Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.


Aparrently, this combiniation is nothing more technical than Prime wearing Jetfire as a backpack. If you think that's complicated, then I hope you had fun with your Action Masters.


You have absolutely no idea how it will work. We got the idea of a backpack from the Power Bot shown at the Australian Toy Fair, but how many of those Power Bots are accurate to the CGI models, not to mention their Deluxe, Voyager, and Leader Class counterparts? None. Plus it was simplified for the kids, that wow factor.

Peaugh reviewed Optimus and said he couldn't find any connection points that really stood out, for Prime to combine with Jetfire, yet we know he does. What does that tell us? Their design team worked above and beyond to make Optimus the best of the best and hide as much as possible so as to not sacrifice the figure.

And there's no need to be smarmy, you're just jealous because all you have IS Action Masters.

starfish wrote:
doomseer wrote:'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.

Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!


Firstly, what the hell's wrong with that? I mean, they are a company aren't they? They exist to make profits, don't they? So what is exactly is your beef with Hasbro trying to make profits by selling toys?

Besides, as I've said before, I personally think that Hasbro would have made a fully-functioning set of Combiners if it were possible. Given the technical demands of a screen-accurate Devastator, I think Hasbro's decision is a good compromise.


What do you mean what's wrong with that? You've got your rose colored glasses on, haven't you?

Yes, they are a company. (We know this.)

Yes, they out to make profits (though that isn't their specific reason for existing, they're just cashing in on their ability to create something.)

Our beef (I agree with him) is that they're making you double dip into the wallet for the SAME TOYS! And in an economy as bad as the one facing us currently. There are people here on the boards who've lost their jobs and will continue to do so. They can't afford the necessities, they most certainly can't afford frivolities (and I'm not so stupid that I'd miss the point that they shouldn't be, and their priorities should be elsewhere. Point still remains though.)

That also affects the children in the household, which means they too won't be able to afford the toys, yet Hasbro is asking us to pay double to get the Constructicons and Devastator? You don't see a problem with that? Really?

It's bad enough to pull that crap when the economy is doing well, but people will pay and Hasbro's gamble paid off. The economy is so bad right now, it's not only a bad idea, but a selfish one and it could backfire in their faces (which would teach them a lesson, really.)

On top of that, they've raised their prices due to the lead paint scare in China. (Yes, I realize the removal of lead paint is a good thing, so please don't patronize me, I can just feel it in your post, it's just dripping in a sarcastic and patronizing tone...)

So now we have to pay extra on the stuff we already buy, and we're expected to pay double when they could've just given us the whole thing from the get go, but they didn't. They took the low road and decided to make us spend ungodly amounts of money, in a terrible economy. (and yes, I realize it's up to the customer as to whether or not spend the money, but this is temptation, plain and simple. If it wasn't toys, it'd be something else, because we're human. And Hasbro's betting on that. And it'll work.)

Good compromise? Sure. We compromise, they make beaucoup bucks. After seeing what Optimus is capable of on his own, there's no excuse. After seeing that the Constructicons have a third mode as a selling point, when that third mode could've been used for the combining tech, it goes to show that there's NO FRIGGIN' EXCUSE.

Many (but not all) fans love Animated. It's slowly grinding toward death and we're not even sure we'll see the figures we were promised, they've already canceled two figures!

Almost everyone can agree on Universe, and it was put on the back burner for both Animated and ROTF, but now that Animated might not even make it to the end of the year, it's a double slap in the face to the Universe fans.

They've put all their hopes, dreams, wishes, and eggs in one basket, and basically popped us all the finger and said "Here's what you get for your precious 25th. Anniversary. DEAL WITH IT."

That...is fiscally irresponsible and STUPID. What if the movie isn't as awesome as it looks? (It happens!) What if the toys don't sell as well as they hoped?

They just scuttled two toylines that were showing returns (admittedly, Animated not as much as Universe) in favor of something that could. Banking on a maybe is a DANGEROUS idea, and they're stickin' it to us to help save them from this risky endeavor.

I know, I know, the first movie did a billion in combined ticket, Blu-Ray and HD/DVD sales.

I know, I know, they couldn't keep the first movie's toys in stock.

But they had a strong economy, people wanting to give TFs a chance on the big screen, and theater attendance was up.

We have the opposite on the economy, attendance at theaters is way, way, way down. And there are people who saw the first movie, couldn't stand it and most definitely won't watch the sequel.

All it takes is one to get the ball rolling, and from there it turns into a potential disaster.

If I were them, sure, I'd lean towards banking on ROTF being the IT movie of 2009, but I'd also be smart enough to see that there are huge financial problems, and I'd keep at least Universe around as a fall back plan in case the eggs in one basket thing blew up in my face.

It's just a ridiculous situation is what it is.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (911932)
Posted by starfish on April 18th, 2009 @ 2:44pm CDT
Autobot032 wrote:True, but look at the Energon Combiners, or JRX/Railracer, or Magnaboss, or Tripredacus. Intricate transformations (especially on the last two in terms of getting it from robot mode to combined mode) Far more intricate than folding a piece here and there, yet they were able to make them combine.

But concessions WERE made, especially with regards to the Beast Wars combiners. Ironhide had a really odd robot mode, for example. And Tripredacus had really terrible hands. These may be minor points, but you can't deny that trade-offs in various modes were made to get those toys exactly right.

But when you are trying to make ALL THREE modes match a pre-existing design, it's very, very tricky to get done.
Autobot032 wrote:But they HAVE done that. Haven't you looked at the pictures of Leader Class Optimus Prime? Or watched Peaugh's review on YouTube?

He's intricate, he's CGI accurate (with a small percentage of cheating), and he even has the Mech Alive gimmick working as well.

I think, in a way, you've answered your own question here. The new Leader Prime is indeed an amazing peiece of work, as is Voyager Starscream. Hasbro designers certainly managed to push the boundaries with those two.

And yet they couldn't make a fully-functional set of Constructicons. Do think they didn't even make the attempt? Do you think they just couldn't be bothered?

Maybe, just maybe, a fully-working Devastator would require levels of engineering and mental gymnastics that are even beyond the designers of such excellent toys as Prime and Starscream.
Autobot032 wrote:You have absolutely no idea how it will work. We got the idea of a backpack from the Power Bot shown at the Australian Toy Fair, but how many of those Power Bots are accurate to the CGI models, not to mention their Deluxe, Voyager, and Leader Class counterparts? None. Plus it was simplified for the kids, that wow factor.

True, we don't know how Prime and Jetfire will merge - which makes it a terrible example to use in a "Hasbro CAN make intricate CGI-accurate combiners" argument, as doomseer was.
Autobot032 wrote:Our beef (I agree with him) is that they're making you double dip into the wallet for the SAME TOYS! And in an economy as bad as the one facing us currently. There are people here on the boards who've lost their jobs and will continue to do so. They can't afford the necessities, they most certainly can't afford frivolities (and I'm not so stupid that I'd miss the point that they shouldn't be, and their priorities should be elsewhere. Point still remains though.)

That also affects the children in the household, which means they too won't be able to afford the toys, yet Hasbro is asking us to pay double to get the Constructicons and Devastator? You don't see a problem with that? Really?

It's bad enough to pull that crap when the economy is doing well, but people will pay and Hasbro's gamble paid off. The economy is so bad right now, it's not only a bad idea, but a selfish one and it could backfire in their faces (which would teach them a lesson, really.)

On top of that, they've raised their prices due to the lead paint scare in China. (Yes, I realize the removal of lead paint is a good thing, so please don't patronize me, I can just feel it in your post, it's just dripping in a sarcastic and patronizing tone...)

So now we have to pay extra on the stuff we already buy, and we're expected to pay double when they could've just given us the whole thing from the get go, but they didn't. They took the low road and decided to make us spend ungodly amounts of money, in a terrible economy.

Nice rant. The simple fact is that Hasbro aren't putting a gun to your head. If people are so stupid that they buy two Devastators when their livelihoods are under threat, more fool them. Meanwhile, those who CAN afford them, and those who are unaffected by the economic climate, and who like the toys, can do so if they wish.
Autobot032 wrote:But this is temptation, plain and simple. If it wasn't toys, it'd be something else, because we're human. And Hasbro's betting on that. And it'll work.

You paint Hasbro as the snake deviously offering the magic apple, hoping we all give into temptation.

But as we all know from the story, the snake was absolutely spot on, because without him and his apple we'd all still be butt-naked and living in ignorance.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (912027)
Posted by Autobot032 on April 18th, 2009 @ 7:55pm CDT
starfish wrote:
Autobot032 wrote:True, but look at the Energon Combiners, or JRX/Railracer, or Magnaboss, or Tripredacus. Intricate transformations (especially on the last two in terms of getting it from robot mode to combined mode) Far more intricate than folding a piece here and there, yet they were able to make them combine.

But concessions WERE made, especially with regards to the Beast Wars combiners. Ironhide had a really odd robot mode, for example. And Tripredacus had really terrible hands. These may be minor points, but you can't deny that trade-offs in various modes were made to get those toys exactly right.

But when you are trying to make ALL THREE modes match a pre-existing design, it's very, very tricky to get done.
Autobot032 wrote:But they HAVE done that. Haven't you looked at the pictures of Leader Class Optimus Prime? Or watched Peaugh's review on YouTube?

He's intricate, he's CGI accurate (with a small percentage of cheating), and he even has the Mech Alive gimmick working as well.

I think, in a way, you've answered your own question here. The new Leader Prime is indeed an amazing peiece of work, as is Voyager Starscream. Hasbro designers certainly managed to push the boundaries with those two.

And yet they couldn't make a fully-functional set of Constructicons. Do think they didn't even make the attempt? Do you think they just couldn't be bothered?

Maybe, just maybe, a fully-working Devastator would require levels of engineering and mental gymnastics that are even beyond the designers of such excellent toys as Prime and Starscream.
Autobot032 wrote:You have absolutely no idea how it will work. We got the idea of a backpack from the Power Bot shown at the Australian Toy Fair, but how many of those Power Bots are accurate to the CGI models, not to mention their Deluxe, Voyager, and Leader Class counterparts? None. Plus it was simplified for the kids, that wow factor.

True, we don't know how Prime and Jetfire will merge - which makes it a terrible example to use in a "Hasbro CAN make intricate CGI-accurate combiners" argument, as doomseer was.
Autobot032 wrote:Our beef (I agree with him) is that they're making you double dip into the wallet for the SAME TOYS! And in an economy as bad as the one facing us currently. There are people here on the boards who've lost their jobs and will continue to do so. They can't afford the necessities, they most certainly can't afford frivolities (and I'm not so stupid that I'd miss the point that they shouldn't be, and their priorities should be elsewhere. Point still remains though.)

That also affects the children in the household, which means they too won't be able to afford the toys, yet Hasbro is asking us to pay double to get the Constructicons and Devastator? You don't see a problem with that? Really?

It's bad enough to pull that crap when the economy is doing well, but people will pay and Hasbro's gamble paid off. The economy is so bad right now, it's not only a bad idea, but a selfish one and it could backfire in their faces (which would teach them a lesson, really.)

On top of that, they've raised their prices due to the lead paint scare in China. (Yes, I realize the removal of lead paint is a good thing, so please don't patronize me, I can just feel it in your post, it's just dripping in a sarcastic and patronizing tone...)

So now we have to pay extra on the stuff we already buy, and we're expected to pay double when they could've just given us the whole thing from the get go, but they didn't. They took the low road and decided to make us spend ungodly amounts of money, in a terrible economy.

Nice rant. The simple fact is that Hasbro aren't putting a gun to your head. If people are so stupid that they buy two Devastators when their livelihoods are under threat, more fool them. Meanwhile, those who CAN afford them, and those who are unaffected by the economic climate, and who like the toys, can do so if they wish.
Autobot032 wrote:But this is temptation, plain and simple. If it wasn't toys, it'd be something else, because we're human. And Hasbro's betting on that. And it'll work.

You paint Hasbro as the snake deviously offering the magic apple, hoping we all give into temptation.

But as we all know from the story, the snake was absolutely spot on, because without him and his apple we'd all still be butt-naked and living in ignorance.


You almost had a good point, but you threw out any importance with me when you brought Religion into the conversation, and made a dig towards the religious. (And let's face it, that's exactly what you're doing.)

Politics & Religion is another forum, and not welcome here.

I'm done talking to you, that was a dirty underhanded tactic.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (912031)
Posted by Counterpunch on April 18th, 2009 @ 8:00pm CDT
Play nice.

Ask yourself with your next post..."Self, is this going to blow Counterpunch's beer buzz?"

If the answer is 'YES!', prepare for an infraction.

:evil:
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (912046)
Posted by Delicon on April 18th, 2009 @ 8:23pm CDT
Counterpunch wrote:Where were you guys yesterday when I was getting kicked in the balls for suggesting that we should be getting a full 3 mode set of Constructicons?


By now I would think you'd be wearing an iron cup.

As for this debate, I'm still holding out hope that they give us 3 mode Constructicons down the line. Something tells me ROTF won't be the only movie Devastator is in and we'll get that true combiner set eventually. Of course "now" would be better, but Hasbro won't get my money "now", it is their loss.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (912271)
Posted by starfish on April 19th, 2009 @ 1:11pm CDT
Delicon wrote:
Counterpunch wrote:Where were you guys yesterday when I was getting kicked in the balls for suggesting that we should be getting a full 3 mode set of Constructicons?


By now I would think you'd be wearing an iron cup.

As for this debate, I'm still holding out hope that they give us 3 mode Constructicons down the line. Something tells me ROTF won't be the only movie Devastator is in and we'll get that true combiner set eventually. Of course "now" would be better, but Hasbro won't get my money "now", it is their loss.


Well, given the survival-rate of the first film, you may well be in luck. I think I'm right in saying that 4 of the 8 Decepticons seen in the first movie will return in ROTF, so I'd give you odds of 50-50.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (912359)
Posted by El Duque on April 19th, 2009 @ 5:38pm CDT
I guaranty that kit-bashers will combine the two sets and create one fully functional three mode Devy.
Re: ROTF Voyager Mixmaster instructions (921932)
Posted by harvester on May 15th, 2009 @ 8:08pm CDT
I know it's not the same but if you guys haven't already seen, there's a legends class set, so thats now the 3rd that does all 3 modes

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/ ... ing/15805/

if you look at Mixmaster, he looks about the same [hard to see cause of size but close enough for a legends class fig].

There still may be a trick up their sleeve, maybe the 7th figure [the one shown in the legends pic but not mentioned or shown for the larger sets] will have something extra like a face or something to go onto Mixmaster.