Bumblebeast wrote:Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.
SlyTF1 wrote:I dont understand why the hell anyone would see a movie for the story, if you want a story, go read a f*ckin book.
Bumblebeast wrote:Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.
Ultra Markus wrote:you have to buy all the constucticons separately for the individual robots and then the set that just forms devastator so you pay twice for all the contructicons if you want both devastator and the individual robots that form him funny how that all works out
Autobot032 wrote:If they can make a Jackhammer mode for Rampage, and weapons tank mode for Mixmaster (that's TWO triplechangers so far...) then they most certainly could've made them combine.
Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)
Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)
harvester wrote:Autobot032 wrote:If they can make a Jackhammer mode for Rampage, and weapons tank mode for Mixmaster (that's TWO triplechangers so far...) then they most certainly could've made them combine.
Im starting to have a new theory based on the toys, probably not going to happen but fits with what they're trying to pull;
Devastator is one thing, one spark in the beginning, he's 6 [or 7] construction vehicles combined. That's the first toy set. Somehow he/his spark gets dispersed into separate sparks [hoping the twins sacrifice themselves in the beginning to do so], then becoming separate entities/bots, those toys being the individual constructicons like this with an odd third mode.
Hard Hacker wrote:I think a lot of you are being unreasonable. If they had included the Devastator body part mode, then the toy would be too complex and over engineered for children to play with. (You know, children! The real target audience of this product.)
doomseer wrote:If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?
doomseer wrote:They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners. Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.
doomseer wrote:'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.
doomseer wrote:Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!
doomseer wrote:If its so difficult to make robots that transform into vehicles AND combine in this day and age then how come they managed it in 1985 with the original devastator? Then again with Superion, Menasor, Bruticus, Defensor, Abominus, need I go on?
doomseer wrote:They were a lot simpler - granted I agree, BUT all the other TF's were then too. They COULD modernise the way they make combiners and have in the past. Landfill? There have been loads of complicated combiners.
doomseer wrote:Isn't Movie Prime even rumoured to be combining with someone in the new film? The figure outline I have seen for that looks as complicated as any other movie aesthetic TF. They COULD make it if they wanted to.
doomseer wrote:'And Yeah TF's are toys - but saying they are all marketed for kids is not true. If that were the case they would not be trying to sell the likes of 25th Anniversary Inferno or indeed most of the classics. They trade on a nostalgia that only Adults can relate to and conveniently are well designed enough to be attractive toys for those who are too young to remember who they were designed to be reminiscent of. Alternators/Binaltech certainly can't be considered toys here in the UK as you have to be 14 to be able to play with one according to the boxes here.
Adults have a much larger disposable income than children and Hasbro etc know this. They aren't making two versions because of difficulty or to appeal to children - they are making two versions so that they can double the amount of cash they make from it. It's clear and obvious and its commercialism and profiteering at its worst. Boooo!
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], TFMSGDerek