SW's SilverHammer wrote:Eat my ass funpub.
Burn wrote:And this is for taking Nemesis Maximo seriously.
*high fives Silly in the face*
carytheone wrote:I can't be assed to do any better right now.
Nemesis Maximo wrote:This looks a billion times better than MP-10. I know I’m in the minority here, but I never liked the proportions on MP-10 vs MP-01. MP-10 has huge feet, gorilla arms, and squat shins. MP-01 always had that regal presence, but the drawback was that he’s too top-heavy to anything except stand straight up. This looks to be the best of both worlds, in terms of poseability, playability, stature, presence, and cartoon accuracy.
william-james88 wrote:Nemesis Maximo wrote:This looks a billion times better than MP-10. I know I’m in the minority here, but I never liked the proportions on MP-10 vs MP-01. MP-10 has huge feet, gorilla arms, and squat shins. MP-01 always had that regal presence, but the drawback was that he’s too top-heavy to anything except stand straight up. This looks to be the best of both worlds, in terms of poseability, playability, stature, presence, and cartoon accuracy.
What about his transformation not representing his onscreen transformation? Or the fake parts? I always felt that should be considered within screen accuracy for Transformers toys.
But matching the onscreen transformations is... literally impossible.william-james88 wrote:What about his transformation not representing his onscreen transformation? Or the fake parts? I always felt that should be considered within screen accuracy for Transformers toys.Nemesis Maximo wrote:This looks a billion times better than MP-10. I know I’m in the minority here, but I never liked the proportions on MP-10 vs MP-01. MP-10 has huge feet, gorilla arms, and squat shins. MP-01 always had that regal presence, but the drawback was that he’s too top-heavy to anything except stand straight up. This looks to be the best of both worlds, in terms of poseability, playability, stature, presence, and cartoon accuracy.
shajaki wrote:But matching the onscreen transformations is... literally impossible.william-james88 wrote:What about his transformation not representing his onscreen transformation? Or the fake parts? I always felt that should be considered within screen accuracy for Transformers toys.Nemesis Maximo wrote:This looks a billion times better than MP-10. I know I’m in the minority here, but I never liked the proportions on MP-10 vs MP-01. MP-10 has huge feet, gorilla arms, and squat shins. MP-01 always had that regal presence, but the drawback was that he’s too top-heavy to anything except stand straight up. This looks to be the best of both worlds, in terms of poseability, playability, stature, presence, and cartoon accuracy.
There's 3 things to a G1 cartoon Transformer: bot mode, alt mode, and the transformation. In trying to translate (slavishly I might add) this to plastic, if you're lucky you'll get 2/3. The transformation of an MP is ALWAYS going to differ from how it looked on the show because they employed trickery and lies.
william-james88 wrote:I really disagree on that. Not that the transformation must be exact, but that in the spirit of the character, the essence, is that these robots transform from the car to a robot and that the parts are shared. Even though there may be a very very complex transformation behind it, the fact that the parts found on the robot Are just the representation of what we see in the alt mode, and not the actual part itself, to me doesn't really make it all that different than having a truck that doesn't transform and also having a robot that doesn't transform and both of them looking identical to the screen model. The reason I love those early masterpiece figures so much is that the they stuck to the idea that the parts are shared. It gives the added complexity of having that same alt mode part found in the robot. I totally understand that some sacrifices must be made one way or another, but just having a totally different part appear out of nowhere, when you also have to hide the part you should be using, for basically every detail of the figure, does not sound good to me.
ultraimpossibleman wrote:Grand innacurration and heavy mistakes !
Diem wrote:This is exactly the kind of nonsense I'm here for.
Ultra Markus wrote:what i dont get is all this cartoon accuracy for the robot but yet still make the truck realistic
they should make the truck mode cartoon accurate as well
ultraimpossibleman wrote:Grand innacurration and heavy mistakes !
Diem wrote:This is exactly the kind of nonsense I'm here for.
Qwan wrote:william-james88 wrote:I really disagree on that. Not that the transformation must be exact, but that in the spirit of the character, the essence, is that these robots transform from the car to a robot and that the parts are shared. Even though there may be a very very complex transformation behind it, the fact that the parts found on the robot Are just the representation of what we see in the alt mode, and not the actual part itself, to me doesn't really make it all that different than having a truck that doesn't transform and also having a robot that doesn't transform and both of them looking identical to the screen model. The reason I love those early masterpiece figures so much is that the they stuck to the idea that the parts are shared. It gives the added complexity of having that same alt mode part found in the robot. I totally understand that some sacrifices must be made one way or another, but just having a totally different part appear out of nowhere, when you also have to hide the part you should be using, for basically every detail of the figure, does not sound good to me.
I agree. I understand it if the parts look totally different between modes (like Optimus' skirt) or an impossible size (like Sunstreaker's canopy), but otherwise I tend to feel disappointed when a piece of the alt-mode gets replaced with a nearly identical part for robot mode.
The only three things I really need in the transformation of any G1-based Optimus, personally, are a) top half forms the cab and bottom half forms the truck bed; b) the smokestacks on his shoulders are the truck's actual smokestacks; and c) his chest windows are the truck's windows. And it looks like this guy isn't doing that last one at least, for barely any good reason honestly.
Qwan wrote:Ultra Markus wrote:what i dont get is all this cartoon accuracy for the robot but yet still make the truck realistic
they should make the truck mode cartoon accurate as well
Ah, but if they went ahead and made a cartoon-accurate truck mode now, then what would they do for Version 4.0?
william-james88 wrote:I really disagree on that. Not that the transformation must be exact, but that in the spirit of the character, the essence, is that these robots transform from the car to a robot and that the parts are shared. Even though there may be a very very complex transformation behind it, the fact that the parts found on the robot Are just the representation of what we see in the alt mode, and not the actual part itself, to me doesn't really make it all that different than having a truck that doesn't transform and also having a robot that doesn't transform and both of them looking identical to the screen model. The reason I love those early masterpiece figures so much is that the they stuck to the idea that the parts are shared. It gives the added complexity of having that same alt mode part found in the robot. I totally understand that some sacrifices must be made one way or another, but just having a totally different part appear out of nowhere, when you also have to hide the part you should be using, for basically every detail of the figure, does not sound good to me.
Qwan wrote:Ultra Markus wrote:what i dont get is all this cartoon accuracy for the robot but yet still make the truck realistic
they should make the truck mode cartoon accurate as well
Ah, but if they went ahead and made a cartoon-accurate truck mode now, then what would they do for Version 4.0?
Sticking to my guns on this. If you want the transformation to be accurate, all you're going to end up with is toys that looks awkward, disproportionate, and with more kibble like their original TOY counterparts. The show accurate chests of Dinobot, Cheetor, Sunstreaker, and so on a literally not possible without faux pieces.Qwan wrote:I agree. I understand it if the parts look totally different between modes (like Optimus' skirt) or an impossible size (like Sunstreaker's canopy), but otherwise I tend to feel disappointed when a piece of the alt-mode gets replaced with a nearly identical part for robot mode.william-james88 wrote:I really disagree on that. Not that the transformation must be exact, but that in the spirit of the character, the essence, is that these robots transform from the car to a robot and that the parts are shared. Even though there may be a very very complex transformation behind it, the fact that the parts found on the robot Are just the representation of what we see in the alt mode, and not the actual part itself, to me doesn't really make it all that different than having a truck that doesn't transform and also having a robot that doesn't transform and both of them looking identical to the screen model. The reason I love those early masterpiece figures so much is that the they stuck to the idea that the parts are shared. It gives the added complexity of having that same alt mode part found in the robot. I totally understand that some sacrifices must be made one way or another, but just having a totally different part appear out of nowhere, when you also have to hide the part you should be using, for basically every detail of the figure, does not sound good to me.
The only three things I really need in the transformation of any G1-based Optimus, personally, are a) top half forms the cab and bottom half forms the truck bed; b) the smokestacks on his shoulders are the truck's actual smokestacks; and c) his chest windows are the truck's windows. And it looks like this guy isn't doing that last one at least, for barely any good reason honestly.
Burn wrote:Agamemnon wrote:Let's get back to talking about Burn's mammoth snout flopping...
Well I am Australian. It's kinda what we're known for.
shajaki wrote:Sticking to my guns on this. If you want the transformation to be accurate, all you're going to end up with is toys that looks awkward, disproportionate, and with more kibble like their original TOY counterparts. The show accurate chests of Dinobot, Cheetor, Sunstreaker, and so on a literally not possible without faux pieces.Qwan wrote:I agree. I understand it if the parts look totally different between modes (like Optimus' skirt) or an impossible size (like Sunstreaker's canopy), but otherwise I tend to feel disappointed when a piece of the alt-mode gets replaced with a nearly identical part for robot mode.william-james88 wrote:I really disagree on that. Not that the transformation must be exact, but that in the spirit of the character, the essence, is that these robots transform from the car to a robot and that the parts are shared. Even though there may be a very very complex transformation behind it, the fact that the parts found on the robot Are just the representation of what we see in the alt mode, and not the actual part itself, to me doesn't really make it all that different than having a truck that doesn't transform and also having a robot that doesn't transform and both of them looking identical to the screen model. The reason I love those early masterpiece figures so much is that the they stuck to the idea that the parts are shared. It gives the added complexity of having that same alt mode part found in the robot. I totally understand that some sacrifices must be made one way or another, but just having a totally different part appear out of nowhere, when you also have to hide the part you should be using, for basically every detail of the figure, does not sound good to me.
The only three things I really need in the transformation of any G1-based Optimus, personally, are a) top half forms the cab and bottom half forms the truck bed; b) the smokestacks on his shoulders are the truck's actual smokestacks; and c) his chest windows are the truck's windows. And it looks like this guy isn't doing that last one at least, for barely any good reason honestly.
Want proof? Google Omnigonex Spinout. That's what you get without transformation cheats.
Cobotron wrote:On this accurate transformation topic. The cheats that happen in 2 dimensions can not be reproduced in 3. It's just science. Remember, animation is a cheat. A trick. Animation tricks the eye into seeing movement from static images.
The only time I can recall in my limited knowledge of Transformers cartoons, that pure transformation accuracy between the show and the toys has happened is Cybertron. Which was a product of using the Toy's CAD models as the show's character models. Great foresight on Has, Tak, and the studio who made the show.
I'd love to see more of this foresight.
That kind of accuracy can be achieved. It's just super time consuming on the animation side, and probably not usually in the budget.
ExciKaiser wrote:Finally, people sharing my advice.
Seeing the latest MP threads I thought I was alone. I really hate all the late MPs exactly for that, even the beast wars ones whith the fake cheetah and dinobot head on their chests.
It's going completely againt the idea of trannsformers in my opinion.
On another forum I've read the term "popples", I think that's the perfect description of the lates MPs.
They're no longer transformers, they're vehicules which contains a completely different robot folded inside.
william-james88 wrote:If ever Sabrblade decides to go on vacation, I am glad to know we can rely on you.
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Asepticon, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Yahoo [Bot]