The Energon Pub

Z3ROhour wrote:btw Down_Shift: packaging rarely prooves anything.

Really, I could of swore that cleared up the original problem I think that the fans are the ones who refuse to let packaging dictate what the function of something is. IE, he's called a bomb on the back of soundwaves package but in GF he was something different. I still can't shake the thought that he was an engine of sorts in GF. Kinda like a mini-con attching to a larger bot to add strength, Laserbeak in the chest adds the same.

Down_Shift wrote:

Z3ROhour wrote:btw Down_Shift: packaging rarely prooves anything.

Really, I could of swore that cleared up the original problem I think that the fans are the ones who refuse to let packaging dictate what the function of something is. IE, he's called a bomb on the back of soundwaves package but in GF he was something different. I still can't shake the thought that he was an engine of sorts in GF. Kinda like a mini-con attching to a larger bot to add strength, Laserbeak in the chest adds the same.

But he isn't a bomb.
He's like a HALO surveilance package.
Bombs explode.

what i'm saying is simplly this: thae packaging has misstakes ALL THE TIME!
look at the back of the UM/Skywarp at the UM pic. NOT AS ADVERTISED.

everywhere i look it says he's a bomb go i say he's a bomb

Z3ROhour wrote:

Down_Shift wrote:

Z3ROhour wrote:btw Down_Shift: packaging rarely prooves anything.

Really, I could of swore that cleared up the original problem I think that the fans are the ones who refuse to let packaging dictate what the function of something is. IE, he's called a bomb on the back of soundwaves package but in GF he was something different. I still can't shake the thought that he was an engine of sorts in GF. Kinda like a mini-con attching to a larger bot to add strength, Laserbeak in the chest adds the same.

But he isn't a bomb.
He's like a HALO surveilance package.
Bombs explode.

what i'm saying is simplly this: thae packaging has misstakes ALL THE TIME!
look at the back of the UM/Skywarp at the UM pic. NOT AS ADVERTISED.

Sorry man, as far as I'm concerned, it's the fans that are mistaken. Most just refuse to take it as what it says on the box because it doesn't make sense to them. To the 6 year old its geared towards, it makes perfect sense.

Does Laserbeak fit the profile of an exploding bomb, no not at all, and to that extent your right. But unless there is something else out there that descibes what it is... wait you know now that I think about it, I'm sure there was an MTMTE profile in the collectors club.

After looking over soundwave and laserbeaks bios, it states that anything that can be stored in vehicle mode is also a seismec nuke. I'll take that as two sources of info stating that laser beak is infact a bomb. Trust me, I don't like it any more then you do, and I also find it kinda silly that he would be a bomb. In GF, he was considered and engine to boose soundwaves power while in vehicle mode, so I guess it really comes down to which story your following.

Down_Shift wrote:

Z3ROhour wrote:

Down_Shift wrote:

Z3ROhour wrote:btw Down_Shift: packaging rarely prooves anything.

Really, I could of swore that cleared up the original problem I think that the fans are the ones who refuse to let packaging dictate what the function of something is. IE, he's called a bomb on the back of soundwaves package but in GF he was something different. I still can't shake the thought that he was an engine of sorts in GF. Kinda like a mini-con attching to a larger bot to add strength, Laserbeak in the chest adds the same.

But he isn't a bomb.
He's like a HALO surveilance package.
Bombs explode.

what i'm saying is simplly this: thae packaging has misstakes ALL THE TIME!
look at the back of the UM/Skywarp at the UM pic. NOT AS ADVERTISED.

Sorry man, as far as I'm concerned, it's the fans that are mistaken. Most just refuse to take it as what it says on the box because it doesn't make sense to them. To the 6 year old its geared towards, it makes perfect sense.

Does Laserbeak fit the profile of an exploding bomb, no not at all, and to that extent your right. But unless there is something else out there that descibes what it is... wait you know now that I think about it, I'm sure there was an MTMTE profile in the collectors club.

After looking over soundwave and laserbeaks bios, it states that anything that can be stored in vehicle mode is also a seismec nuke. I'll take that as two sources of info stating that laser beak is infact a bomb. Trust me, I don't like it any more then you do, and I also find it kinda silly that he would be a bomb. In GF, he was considered and engine to boose soundwaves power while in vehicle mode, so I guess it really comes down to which story your following.

blah blah blah sementics!

use that thing inside your melon and LOOK AT YOUR TOY!
does it explode?
no
no explode
no bomb

just casue the dang box says something, doesn't make it true.

think.

i'm done with this arguement. if you can't see the obvious then i'm wasting my time.

enjoy your limitations.

actually looking at him he looks like the "bomb" that jango fett releases from the slave 1 toward obiwan in starwars episode 2

Z3ROhour wrote:blah blah blah sementics!

use that thing inside your melon and LOOK AT YOUR TOY!
does it explode?
no
no explode
no bomb

just casue the dang box says something, doesn't make it true.

think.

i'm done with this arguement. if you can't see the obvious then i'm wasting my time.

enjoy your limitations.

Of course it doesn't explode... it's a toy. Don't try and insult my intelligence when you're asking me to look for an exploding bomb inside an action figure.(That's exactally what I read from your post) The box isn't the only thing that says it's a bomb, so does the the OTFCC MTMTE bios. Two sources of information make it a credable fact, that's the way these things work. You don't like it, that's fine, neither do I. I didn't think that was at question.

As for limitations, I said in my previous post that GF Soundwave used Laserbeak as an engine so I'm not sure what your going on about any more. The one thing I don't get is how you can say what writtin on the packaging is wrong? I'm not looking for an arguement here, just a response. Where and when was it decided that what's written on the box is wrong? I mean if I were to look at a bottle of motor oil and it said it was toxic if injested does that mean that it may very well be wrong? Don't think so.