ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The real problem is the front half.
Leonardo wrote:Take your lips off my pipe!
Quoted for truth.Ironhidensh wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The real problem is the front half.
No. Just, no. The real problem is that they wasted time, effort, and resources on that 100% unnecessary tender/base section, but couldn’t be bother to put just a tiny bit of extra effort into the actual figure. Hell, even a partsforming cover that turns into a shield would have been far more acceptable.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The real problem is the front half. It's a lot fatter than the rear because of the train kibble; without that, the spots where the rear isn't as smooth wouldn't be nearly as noticeable. There rear being less smooth and having a couple gaps is necessary for transformation.
That being said, they could maybe have made things smoother if he had a toy-accurate chest. But not a guarantee.
It's actually a bit worse on this version than on the original toy, partly because the train panels are more detailed and partly because unlike the 1986 toy this Astrotrain has actual feet that they needed room to stash.william-james88 wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The real problem is the front half. It's a lot fatter than the rear because of the train kibble; without that, the spots where the rear isn't as smooth wouldn't be nearly as noticeable. There rear being less smooth and having a couple gaps is necessary for transformation.
That being said, they could maybe have made things smoother if he had a toy-accurate chest. But not a guarantee.
I agree, my bigger issue is the front half. I know the blockiness is show accurate, but I always hated that it simply copied the toy's innacuracy to a shuttle.
Rodimus Prime wrote:I'm getting slowly convinced that this figure sux all around... I'm more and more relieved that I didn't buy it.
That's because on the original G1, the front of the engine doesn't have to protrude past the legs. Here, it has to because of the feet.-Kanrabat- wrote:It's just a wee bit less obvious on the original G1.
Ironhidensh wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The real problem is the front half.
No. Just, no. The real problem is that they wasted time, effort, and resources on that 100% unnecessary tender/base section, but couldn’t be bother to put just a tiny bit of extra effort into the actual figure. Hell, even a partsforming cover that turns into a shield would have been far more acceptable.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:I still advocate for tossing the cartoon-based chest in favor of a toy-based one as the smoothest solution. A toy-based chest would be able to neatly slide or fold over itself. Possibly even extend further back.
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], EvasionModeBumblebee, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], MSN [Bot], TF-fan kev777, TulioDude