o.supreme wrote:I guess yay for Cyclonus finally looking the way he should, but boo because it only took 4 issues to shoehorn in Windblade
william-james88 wrote:Seibertron wrote:Just realized one of the things that really bugs me about this series ... the characters seem like they're drawn just fine, but the many panels with open backgrounds with little on the horizon and nothing but sky really irk me.
Me too. Not sure if I mentioned it before or not, but it really feels like the bots and the background dont exist in the same space. Cybertron feels very empty.
o.supreme wrote:I guess yay for Cyclonus finally looking the way he should, but boo because it only took 4 issues to shoehorn in Windblade (and yes I'm aware she was planned from the outset in this new series..) I mean I get why Hasbro forced IDW to push her into so much story previously, but this is a NEW continuity. The fact that Hasbro seems intent on retconning the original TF history to include Windblade is frustrating. Might as well draw her in the background of reprinted Marvel Comics, or insert her randomly into original series episodes Lucas *special edition* style...
william-james88 wrote:o.supreme wrote:I guess yay for Cyclonus finally looking the way he should, but boo because it only took 4 issues to shoehorn in Windblade
She is in issue 1.
Randomhero wrote:She’s in issue one...
o.supreme wrote:william-james88 wrote:o.supreme wrote:I guess yay for Cyclonus finally looking the way he should, but boo because it only took 4 issues to shoehorn in Windblade
She is in issue 1.
That only makes it worse...
Randomhero wrote: No it just makes your argument worse since it starts with your rant about taking 4 before “shoehorning” her in. She’s been in it from the start. Here’s the thing about Windblade. She debuted in 2013. Six years ago, the better half of a decade. She is now older than the length of the the original G1 cartoons and toyline. Windblade now has history in transformers and the complaints about her really matter anymore.
o.supreme wrote:Randomhero wrote: No it just makes your argument worse since it starts with your rant about taking 4 before “shoehorning” her in. She’s been in it from the start. Here’s the thing about Windblade. She debuted in 2013. Six years ago, the better half of a decade. She is now older than the length of the the original G1 cartoons and toyline. Windblade now has history in transformers and the complaints about her really matter anymore.
She debuted in the OLD IDW Universe, which is thankfully dead and gone, and should stay that way. If IDW wanted to try to bring Transformers back to it's roots, which was the whole point of the reboot, (in which Windblade was never present), then it has automatically failed. Also its amazing that in six years she did nothing of significance to contribute to the overall TF mythos. You don't see Drift, or the Torchbearers, or Sunstorm in this new IDW universe, for good reason. The same should be with Windblade, just my opinion I know it's not popular, but it's just frustrating that every new comic incarnation and animated series has less and less of what has made Transformers great in times past.
o.supreme wrote:She debuted in the OLD IDW Universe, which is thankfully dead and gone, and should stay that way. If IDW wanted to try to bring Transformers back to it's roots, which was the whole point of the reboot, (in which Windblade was never present), then it has automatically failed.
o.supreme wrote:Also its amazing that in six years she did nothing of significance to contribute to the overall TF mythos. You don't see Drift, or the Torchbearers, or Sunstorm in this new IDW universe, for good reason. The same should be with Windblade, just my opinion I know it's not popular,
o.supreme wrote:but it's just frustrating that every new comic incarnation and animated series has less and less of what has made Transformers great in times past.
Seibertron wrote:william-james88 wrote:Seibertron wrote:Just realized one of the things that really bugs me about this series ... the characters seem like they're drawn just fine, but the many panels with open backgrounds with little on the horizon and nothing but sky really irk me.
Me too. Not sure if I mentioned it before or not, but it really feels like the bots and the background dont exist in the same space. Cybertron feels very empty.
Yes! Exactly. I dont have any real complaints about how the Transformers are drawn in this series. They look good,maybe a little more styling would be good, and maybe a little more detail such as mouths when they are drawn from a distance, but the lack of backgrounds and minimal characters makes the planet seem empty.
o.supreme wrote:Randomhero wrote: No it just makes your argument worse since it starts with your rant about taking 4 before “shoehorning” her in. She’s been in it from the start. Here’s the thing about Windblade. She debuted in 2013. Six years ago, the better half of a decade. She is now older than the length of the the original G1 cartoons and toyline. Windblade now has history in transformers and the complaints about her really matter anymore.
She debuted in the OLD IDW Universe, which is thankfully dead and gone, and should stay that way. If IDW wanted to try to bring Transformers back to it's roots, which was the whole point of the reboot, (in which Windblade was never present), then it has automatically failed. Also its amazing that in six years she did nothing of significance to contribute to the overall TF mythos. You don't see Drift, or the Torchbearers, or Sunstorm in this new IDW universe, for good reason. The same should be with Windblade, just my opinion I know it's not popular, but it's just frustrating that every new comic incarnation and animated series has less and less of what has made Transformers great in times past.
o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
Va'al wrote:Deadput wrote:Actually I don't know my mother's name is Valerie so is Va'al actually my mother?
Yes. Now go to your room and don't play with yourself.
Deadput wrote:o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
Doesn't literally change the fact it was a toy commercial.
Transformers has always relied more on spectacle rather then actually being deep.
o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
She debuted as a toy fan made by fans and was put in the comics because of that reason. IDW didn’t create her, hasbro and fans did.
Doesn't literally change the fact it was a toy commercial.
Deadput wrote:o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
Doesn't literally change the fact it was a toy commercial.
Transformers has always relied more on spectacle rather then actually being deep.
Fair. As a counterpoint: Marvel UK showed early on it could be both. I like it when it's both and when there are rad transforming robot toys to buy of the characters in the good media. This doesn't happen often, sadly.Deadput wrote:o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
Doesn't literally change the fact it was a toy commercial.
Transformers has always relied more on spectacle rather then actually being deep.
The original comics did have some depth to the storytelling, especially after Furman took over. I understand that the franchise is here because most kids watched the cartoon and bought the toys, but I'm a comic reader who considers the Marvel comic to be the defining continuity and origin story of G1, and I bought toys because of those stories and how much more developed some of the characters were as opposed to the cartoon.Deadput wrote:o.supreme wrote:I find it interesting how those that minimize the original series to *just a toy commercial* completely gloss over the fact, that if not for it, we wouldn't be here 35 years later discussing it.... that's gratitude for ya...
Doesn't literally change the fact it was a toy commercial.
Transformers has always relied more on spectacle rather then actually being deep.
D-Maximal_Primal wrote:Cyclonus was the only part of the new issue that interested me. It's sad that the new continuity is taking so much of its sweet ass time. I want to be interested but they are giving me nothing
william-james88 wrote:D-Maximal_Primal wrote:Cyclonus was the only part of the new issue that interested me. It's sad that the new continuity is taking so much of its sweet ass time. I want to be interested but they are giving me nothing
Oh man, its insulting how boring this comic is. This is a brand about giant robots warring across the galaxy and we get the equivalent of watching the grass grow.
I forgot to unsubscribe for this issue, but will do so this week.
Return to Transformers Cartoons and Comics Forum
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Blastback, EvasionModeBumblebee, Glyph, Google [Bot], UltOrange, Yahoo [Bot]