Aaron Archer basically said the same thing about losing heads for years and I always just shook my head. This is the line geared towards older children/teens and collectors. Is losing parts really that big a problem? Assuming you're an adult collector, do you really have trouble losing pieces, still? I just don't get the argument. Leave the head in, if you transform it maybe you'll have to set it aside for a moment. Is setting it off to the side any worse in reality from just turning it backwards and down into a hole to the degree where you won't allow yourself to have fun with something? These are all rhetorical questions, because I think this argument is just silly. If you don't like the toys, hey, no biggie, that's you doin' you, just would hate to think someone might deprive themselves of potentially good representations of characters that they enjoy in their hobby because of anxiety over losing a part.Coptur wrote:I know a lot of people are excited about headmasters but i'm really not as i've always hated the gimmick where if you lose the head the toy is basically useless and stuck in one mode because it looks daft and incomplete when in robot mode.
Massive shame that Blaster, Soundwave and Galvatron will now suffer from a terrible gimmick i wanted all three characters but now I really won't get them. shame.
That's how I'm feeling about these. It looks like an overall play pattern that I'm not ashamed to admit is super appealing to me. These look like things I will actually mess with, repeatedly, in various fun ways. A lot of stuff lately just turns into pretty looking shelf ornamentation over time.Diem wrote:I'm cautiously optimistic.
Also folks, be prepared for price hikes. If you think you're going to get to mess with that Skullcruncher for $10-$13, you should probably go ahead and save up another $7-$10 now and reset your expectations. I fully anticipate a pricing model similar to the Star Wars Black Series.