The Energon Pub

Sabrblade wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:On top of that the best mold fit they already had at the time of release and it would have been PotP Jazz, which I'm actually surprised did not happen.

To be fair, that mold kinda sucked anyway.

Oh, big time, so I'm actually fine with them using the Mirage mold. It was just the absolute correct shape for the car for Crasher that is seemed like a no brainer.

Yeah, but, legally-speaking, that's probably a reason why they didn't ever use it for Crasher.

Also because the robot mode was bad, in general, for Jazz or Crasher. Correct on the alt mode though, it would have looked nice in car mode for her.

DISCHARGE wrote:Does anyone else feel Crasher wasn't done justice?
I don't mind the mirage mold, I prefer the Siege version, but it might have looked better on the Cybertron Hot Shot/Excellion mold.

IMG_20250805_233008106~2.jpg

I'm not opening her. After looking at G2 Mirage, it's such a bad alt mode.
But in a box, in robot mode, behind a plastic window... Mm.

What are those 2 cars next to G2 Mirage? Thanks.

megatran wrote:

DISCHARGE wrote:Does anyone else feel Crasher wasn't done justice?
I don't mind the mirage mold, I prefer the Siege version, but it might have looked better on the Cybertron Hot Shot/Excellion mold.

IMG_20250805_233008106~2.jpg

I'm not opening her. After looking at G2 Mirage, it's such a bad alt mode.
But in a box, in robot mode, behind a plastic window... Mm.

What are those 2 cars next to G2 Mirage? Thanks.

Tonka GoBots Crasher (second version) and Spychanger Wheeljack.

Sabrblade wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

TF-fan kev777 wrote:On top of that the best mold fit they already had at the time of release and it would have been PotP Jazz, which I'm actually surprised did not happen.

To be fair, that mold kinda sucked anyway.

Oh, big time, so I'm actually fine with them using the Mirage mold. It was just the absolute correct shape for the car for Crasher that is seemed like a no brainer.

Yeah, but, legally-speaking, that's probably a reason why they didn't ever use it for Crasher.

That, and Fracture was also a Walmart exclusive so it isn't just a homage to the original figure but also a homage to how it was sold.

Emerje

Out of curiosity, what exactly are the "legal reasons"? Considering Hasbro bought Tonka in 1991. Since Tonka is no longer a separate entity it's not like they can make new GoBots toys. Yet for some reason neither can Hasbro. lol
Is there a third party involved as to why their original likeness cannot be recreated?
I wouldn't mind seeing a few more made.

Till-all-R1 wrote:Out of curiosity, what exactly are the "legal reasons"? Considering Hasbro bought Tonka in 1991. Since Tonka is no longer a separate entity it's not like they can make new GoBots toys. Yet for some reason neither can Hasbro. lol
Is there a third party involved as to why their original likeness cannot be recreated?
I wouldn't mind seeing a few more made.

Hasbro buying Tonka didn't really get them GoBots as characters, just the names associated with it. Cartoon likenesses are owned by WB (or whoever, it traded hands a lot over the years) and the toy likenesses still belong to Bandai. Companies didn't always fully protect their IPs back in the day, it's why there's so many Transformers characters in the comics that are owned by Marvel. This stuff was basically considered disposable, nobody expected it to survive the 80s so they didn't put a lot of effort into protecting all of it. Hasbro had a little more foresight than most companies of the time, but a lot of toy companies abandoned IPs as quickly as they made them. Lately Nacelle has been snapping up a lot of abandoned IPs like Robo Force, Insectaurs, Cowboys of Moo Mesa, Biker Mice from Mars and most recently Power Lords.

Emerje

Emerje wrote:Companies didn't always fully protect their IPs back in the day, it's why there's so many Transformers characters in the comics that are owned by Marvel.

If you're referring to the likes of Circuit Breaker and Death's Head, those two are owned by Marvel because they made their first debuts in comics belonging to Marvel first and foremost before they first appeared in the Marvel Transformers comics. Any character who originally first debuted in the Transformers comics defaulted to Hasbro's ownership since the Marvel Transformers comics were a licensed series rather than a Marvel-original work. So it's just Circuit Breaker and Death's Head (and Spider-Man and all the cameos from Issue #3) whom Marvel own. Everyone else who first debuted in the Marvel Transformers comics are Hasbro's IP.

megatran wrote:

DISCHARGE wrote:Does anyone else feel Crasher wasn't done justice?
I don't mind the mirage mold, I prefer the Siege version, but it might have looked better on the Cybertron Hot Shot/Excellion mold.

The attachment IMG_20250805_233008106~2.jpg is no longer available

I'm not opening her. After looking at G2 Mirage, it's such a bad alt mode.
But in a box, in robot mode, behind a plastic window... Mm.

What are those 2 cars next to G2 Mirage? Thanks.

OG go-bot Crasher and Spychangers Wheeljack

Sabrblade wrote:

DISCHARGE wrote:Does anyone else feel Crasher wasn't done justice?
I don't mind the mirage mold, I prefer the Siege version, but it might have looked better on the Cybertron Hot Shot/Excellion mold.

That mold didn't yet exist at the time the Velocitron subline was first released. Crasher is a reissue of that same release, rereleased due to how difficult to find she was the first time around.

Plus, she's inspired by the 2007 Movie Fracture figure that was likewise a Mirage redeco, as they can't make her look too much like the original GoBot/Machine Robo toy whose likeness is owned by rival company Bandai. She needs to look legally distinct enough in order to not infringe on Bandai's IP, especially when trying to market the toy in Japan where Bandai's competition with TakaraTomy is even greater than it is with Hasbro in the west.

I would have preferred a straight reissue of the older one if they "have to" do what's already been done. I woulda still wanted it in the aotp packaging.
The alt mode is just cleaner and I remember liking the robot mode. I like the mirage robot mode, and Crashers robot mode is nice.. but if they had time to wait to rebatch that mirage mold to fit it in aotp packaging.. they had time to wait for greener opportunities
Like, plans change.
It's like saying all the egghead's at hasbro are like "no man, we can't make changes." So I'm saying, they could a been like hey let's not pay to bring out another mold, they could have just used the hot shot mold after molding Excellion and just slap Crasher/Fracture color scheme in it.
It's just a cool figure/ property and I think they could have been more creative.

The whole point of rereleasing Velocitron Crasher in AOTP was to give those who missed out on her the first time a second chance to get her, because of how difficult she was to find the first time around. People wanted her but couldn't find her, and now they can.

Sabrblade wrote:The whole point of rereleasing Velocitron Crasher in AOTP was to give those who missed out on her the first time a second chance to get her, because of how difficult she was to find the first time around. People wanted her but couldn't find her, and now they can.

I had to wait for lucky eBay finds that happened to be at the normal price plus shipping... Twice.

The reissue of Crasher and Cosmos were certainly not a luxury.

So, regarding the supposed rumors of Walmart having cancelled the Cybertron capsule line and Sideways in particular, I think we can safely say that that isn't the case, because...



My Walmart had seven of them (six now, thanks to me).

For those that need, I have an extra Sideways. The right side of the box is crushed. All I ask is cost and shipping. All of which is negotiable.