The Energon Pub

RAcast wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:It's not copyright/Trademark issue. Hasbro already used the term "Terrorcon" for something else entirely in this series. So their homage toys to the G1 Terrorcons got added to the ranks of the new Predacon faction.

They didn't "start" as Terrorcons because the following already took possession of the name:
[img]...[/img]

Along with a WHOOOOLE lotta corpses.

Sabrblade wrote:It's not copyright/Trademark issue. Hasbro already used the term "Terrorcon" for something else entirely in this series. So their homage toys to the G1 Terrorcons got added to the ranks of the new Predacon faction.

They didn't "start" as Terrorcons because the following already took possession of the name:

I think everyone is assuming I don't watch Prime... I love Prime.

My point is that switching names/groupings/etc... well, I guess I think of the TF universe as cohesive. I think of Optimus, for example, as ONE character - not a 1000 different versions/depictions (with the exception of BW Optimus, which was clearly presented as an Optimus descendent/disciple).

Ya know, I understand what you're saying, but it seems weird to group the G1 Terrorcons into the Predacon group. I never thought of Abominus as a bunch of dragons (as the BH Predacons seem to mainly consist of). Seems like the Terrorcons were supposed to have more in common with monsters and mutants. What am I supposed to call the Abominus crew now? Predacon combiner team?

And can we call the "Terrorcon's" something more creative? Did Hasbro tell the production crew not to use the word "zombie" anywhere? Zombiecons.... hmmm... Or how about Dead-Spark's? Reboot's? DEAD-BOOT'S! Reanimicon's? Heck, "Junk bot's" might be a better fit, too. Anyway, I think Terrorcon's is not the best choice, and should have been saved for the Terrorcon's proper (it's one thing to use a group name if the group doesn't appear, but stealing it before they can hit the stage? UNCOOL).

They should've repainted the Prime Terrorcons as the Prime Terrorcons, just to drive us crazy. Plus unified combiners always looked pretty neat, and clear plastic is perfect for the Dark Energon effect.


... I had forgotten about the undead Terrorcons.

Noideaforaname wrote:They should've repainted the Prime Terrorcons as the Prime Terrorcons, just to drive us crazy. Plus unified combiners always looked pretty neat, and clear plastic is perfect for the Dark Energon effect.


... I had forgotten about the undead Terrorcons.

Yeah, I was really expecting a unified color scheme out of the box set. At least they did the weapons translucent, they look great in that dark energon purple.

Sabrblade wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:Remember those micromaster style guys that KB had, The ones that were homages to the G1 combiners? they were smaller than legends & were good combiners.

No. Just, no. Stop right there. Did you ever buy any of those? Did you honestly believe that those were new/modern toy molds?

Those KB Toys Micromaster Combiners were anything but new. They were 1992 molds rereleased from Japan, and had as much combiner kibble as G1 Devastator.

Not to mention ZERO articulation outside of the shoulders and head, and that's only happenstance due to the toys' engineering rather than any forethought on their playability.

If anything, they were a step backwards compared to what we've gotten here. If you want parts-forming, inarticulate bricks for combiners, stop asking for new molds and go buy the 1984-1992 toys, cuz that's apparently what you're looking for.

But we have here is a modern day combiner formed with no parts-forming kibble, fully articulated, and visually recognizable as to who it's meant to resemble. Any valid criticisms of it would be in part due to its small size as a Cyberverse Legion class combiner. Any higher expectations for it are asking for way too much since it would take a larger size class to satisfy them. But that's not what these are and is not what we're getting. Don't like it? Fine. Don't like it because it's not GEEWUN? Tough.

I am typing all of this while laughing at the current conversation in this thread, but I know it will be viewed as intending some kind of vitriol, and all I can really do is assure people that that is not my intent at all, but here goes....


This is what drives me crazy about this place. Why is someone not allowed to prefer the toy they happen to prefer? It's like some people are all caught up in this race to be the ones who genuflect the hardest before the new figures, and then screech the loudest that people can't like the old ones. This is just stupid.

For the establishment of my credentials, since that's apparently required here, yes, I did buy those old KB ones, and yes, I did know, even back at the time, that they weren't new molds but rather repaints.

And yes, perhaps most mind shatteringly unbelievably of all, I did like them, despite their lack of articulation.

I also kind of like this new Abominus bunch, so I guess you can start telling me how wrong I am for liking something new AND something old.

So the guy likes the old toys more than he likes the new ones....in reality, who cares? I know, GEEWUNNER and all the other tragically creative insults, "Everyone's tired of having people hate on the new things" great. But geez guys, if people don't like what you like, it's really not a personal attack or anything.

Personally, I am a bit disappointed that the package deal isn't in the regular, individual figure colors. The regular, non-translucent plastic individual figure colors, before some one is burning up with the need to tell me the colors are largely the same, only with translucent plastic. I know that. I'm just growing more and more skeptical that the individuals will show up around me, and had started counting on getting the box as a way of getting all five. I know, I don't like the colors on these, and I am prepared to bear the brunt of your collective scorn as a result of my transgression.

Dagon wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:Remember those micromaster style guys that KB had, The ones that were homages to the G1 combiners? they were smaller than legends & were good combiners.

No. Just, no. Stop right there. Did you ever buy any of those? Did you honestly believe that those were new/modern toy molds?

Those KB Toys Micromaster Combiners were anything but new. They were 1992 molds rereleased from Japan, and had as much combiner kibble as G1 Devastator.

Not to mention ZERO articulation outside of the shoulders and head, and that's only happenstance due to the toys' engineering rather than any forethought on their playability.

If anything, they were a step backwards compared to what we've gotten here. If you want parts-forming, inarticulate bricks for combiners, stop asking for new molds and go buy the 1984-1992 toys, cuz that's apparently what you're looking for.

But we have here is a modern day combiner formed with no parts-forming kibble, fully articulated, and visually recognizable as to who it's meant to resemble. Any valid criticisms of it would be in part due to its small size as a Cyberverse Legion class combiner. Any higher expectations for it are asking for way too much since it would take a larger size class to satisfy them. But that's not what these are and is not what we're getting. Don't like it? Fine. Don't like it because it's not GEEWUN? Tough.

I am typing all of this while laughing at the current conversation in this thread, but I know it will be viewed as intending some kind of vitriol, and all I can really do is assure people that that is not my intent at all, but here goes....


This is what drives me crazy about this place. Why is someone not allowed to prefer the toy they happen to prefer? It's like some people are all caught up in this race to be the ones who genuflect the hardest before the new figures, and then screech the loudest that people can't like the old ones. This is just stupid.

For the establishment of my credentials, since that's apparently required here, yes, I did buy those old KB ones, and yes, I did know, even back at the time, that they weren't new molds but rather repaints.

And yes, perhaps most mind shatteringly unbelievably of all, I did like them, despite their lack of articulation.

I also kind of like this new Abominus bunch, so I guess you can start telling me how wrong I am for liking something new AND something old.

So the guy likes the old toys more than he likes the new ones....in reality, who cares? I know, GEEWUNNER and all the other tragically creative insults, "Everyone's tired of having people hate on the new things" great. But geez guys, if people don't like what you like, it's really not a personal attack or anything.

Personally, I am a bit disappointed that the package deal isn't in the regular, individual figure colors. The regular, non-translucent plastic individual figure colors, before some one is burning up with the need to tell me the colors are largely the same, only with translucent plastic. I know that. I'm just growing more and more skeptical that the individuals will show up around me, and had started counting on getting the box as a way of getting all five. I know, I don't like the colors on these, and I am prepared to bear the brunt of your collective scorn as a result of my transgression.

It has more to do with double standards, really. Comparing modern combiners with their G1 predecessors is almost comparing apples and oranges. G1 Combiners had a lot of excess parts (except Liokaiser) which were integrated with the modern ones. Engineering-wise, they're superior (in varying degrees, especially with the Energon ones), but in looks it's all in the eye of the beholder. Some prefer the blocky look of G1, fine. But to state they were better overall? That's asking for trouble.

MetroSUplex wrote:My point is that switching names/groupings/etc... well, I guess I think of the TF universe as cohesive. I think of Optimus, for example, as ONE character - not a 1000 different versions/depictions (with the exception of BW Optimus, which was clearly presented as an Optimus descendent/disciple).

I see. I just hope you mean this figuratively rather than literally, since images like the fallowing would likely give you a headache:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:It has more to do with double standards, really. Comparing modern combiners with their G1 predecessors is almost comparing apples and oranges. G1 Combiners had a lot of excess parts (except Liokaiser) which were integrated with the modern ones. Engineering-wise, they're superior (in varying degrees, especially with the Energon ones), but in looks it's all in the eye of the beholder. Some prefer the blocky look of G1, fine. But to state they were better overall? That's asking for trouble.

Ok, and if I'm not interested in the engineering of the figures, then what? What if I don't base my opinion formulation on what you do? You in general, not YOU specifically and personally.

What if I like something for reasons that contradict the reasons you have for disliking it? What if I prefer something based on the looks of it...like what if I like G1 Abominus more becuase it has fists....actual, clenched hand fists, and not two monster heads and two front monster legs that are supposed to be the robot hand in combined mode? What if integrated parts don't matter to me? Perhaps, and I know you said this is asking for trouble, but I guess trouble isn't enough to frighten off one as intrepid as I, perhaps I think G1 Abominus is better because it has fists and not fist approximations.

I'm not saying I do, but am rather posing the question.

If engineering does not play into my decision at all, how am I wrong for liking the toy with the less impressive engineering?

Noideaforaname wrote:They should've repainted the Prime Terrorcons as the Prime Terrorcons, just to drive us crazy. Plus unified combiners always looked pretty neat, and clear plastic is perfect for the Dark Energon effect.


... I had forgotten about the undead Terrorcons.

I third that. Might have been an interesting look...

Course, I'd be happy with any repaint, just to have something different. I'm sure Hasbro is just cutting costs again. Remember the financial post on here a few weeks ago? Hasbro is all about cutting costs now - layoffs, smaller toys, less paint apps, etc.

I guess this set will sell regardless (I'd expect it to), so kudos to Hasbro for pinching a penny. However, I'm concerned if this is their overall approach to the TF brand. Shrinking and reducing variety of your product when it's not selling well? McDonald's does the opposite: more menu variety during hard times.

Dagon wrote:If engineering does not play into my decision at all, how am I wrong for liking the toy with the less impressive engineering?

There's a difference between subjectively liking something and objectively rating quality. The former's fine, the latter is what I was getting at.

On the topic of quality, I think thats hard to compare between a G1 figure and a current figure since they both had different goals. G1 seemed to go after a certain look at all costs (kibble, lack of poseability) where as new toys look for playability most, as I guess thats how they figure kids will look at it and ask their folks to buy it for them, even if the looks are a little crazy. Plus I think kids these days are way more open minded about not having typical fists and such, so yeah, not really great to compare them on the same scale. It would be better to compare this with that rotf legends combiner I had forgotten about, in which this one looks much better.

Not to discredit the coolness of Abominus, but this creation isn't really that insane when it comes to engineering. They are using lots of peg holes and tabs. Its not like anyone can really say that any of the limbs really do look like limbs, but rather a cluster of robot parts that overall do a decent job of forming a big stump for a foot, or fingers/claws/stabbing things for fingers. But it still looks like it would be a crazy monster mash, so the potential fun of this compensates for all of that.

Two things that aggravate me about TF collectors:

1) The idea that even after 30 years, every new figure should look just like the original, even if that original toy wasn't even a Transformer when it was created.

2) The unrealistic expectations that these figures should continue to increase in quality, engineering, articulation, etc., but that prices should never go up. The implication that Hasbro should make thrid-party-quality toys and sell them at 1984 prices.

Sabrblade wrote:I see. I just hope you mean this figuratively rather than literally, since images like the fallowing would likely give you a headache:

The one with the multiple Optimi is pretty sweet, actually. If you think about it, it's in line with what I'm saying: acknowledging that there are other versions of a certain character, rather than renaming the hell out of things! BW, as I mentioned, at least referenced G1 at one point, rather than exist as an unexplained variation of G1.

You ever read a comic book in the middle of a story arc and have to suffer pages and pages of "previously in our book, this happened!"? I hate that. I think serials like TF can be long and expansive, without the need to constantly reinvent or explain itself for each generation. I'm pretty sure I started watching the G1 cartoon in pieces, and around the middle - my head didn't --> In other words, Prime COULD have referenced the G1 Terrorcon's without showing them, rather than focus on only the content their CG machines could pump out on a budget. As with any CG animation, the visual limitations really limit the writing, which is a shame. I'm sure when the term "Terrorcon" got used for the zombies, there were no plans to actually have Terrorcon's in the show, and the writing staff figured a conflict would thus never arise. Or that the show is for children and they won't notice the new use of the term.

MINDVVIPE wrote:On the topic of quality, I think thats hard to compare between a G1 figure and a current figure since they both had different goals. G1 seemed to go after a certain look at all costs (kibble, lack of poseability) where as new toys look for playability most...

Makes sense to me. My mind tends to imagine the G1's better than they were. Then I see them at Con's and think, "dang... we've come a long way..."

GuyIncognito wrote:Two things that aggravate me about TF collectors:

1) The idea that even after 30 years, every new figure should look just like the original, even if that original toy wasn't even a Transformer when it was created.

2) The unrealistic expectations that these figures should continue to increase in quality, engineering, articulation, etc., but that prices should never go up. The implication that Hasbro should make thrid-party-quality toys and sell them at 1984 prices.

1) Sometimes the originals just looked better. Hun-gurr, for example, looked better as a G1 toy. He was big, had a cool head, nice transformation, etc. This new one is nice, too... but come on. Don't say you don't wish they kept the original scales of 1 large center piece and 4 smaller limbs!

2) At what rate should the prices go up? During a recession? These are toys, after all. Do you think parents today are willing to pay double of what they did in 1984? For a toy? I mean, I understand what you're saying, but this isn't the automobile industry we're talking about. At a certain price point, parents stop buying toys (or severely limit the amount they buy), which makes selling toys a money-losing matter. KB Toys went bankrupt, FAO Schwartz is gone... Not to mention that parents today (IMO) are more likely to spend money on digital games for their kids' iPads and phones. Toys and pretend-play are on their way out, in favor of electronics and video games. Jacking toy prices up, at this point in the game, is NOT the way to win back the kids...

Plus, the technology and quality HAS improved. No more GPS, for example. Cheaper components (plastic vs. diecast) and yet longer-lasting toys.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure that most diehard collectors who are willing to pay $100 for an Iron-hide by a third party, or $45 for a 3rd party Brawn... well, they'd pay more than 1984 prices if Hasbro made some of the classic G1 characters. You could say that the Masterpiece line sells pretty well, too.

MetroSUplex, do you understand inflation? I'm guessing not.

GuyIncognito wrote:MetroSUplex, do you understand inflation? I'm guessing not.

it's how you get bigger balloons, silly!

GuyIncognito wrote:MetroSUplex, do you understand inflation? I'm guessing not.

You do realize that Hasbro is doing what I said they should, right? They are selling toys at the same prices as 1984. They're just smaller now.

Inflation is a great term. But it's just one piece of the economic puzzle, right? That's all I was saying. "Inflation" is too simple of an answer for a problem as complex as toy sales.

With the toy industry down as a whole, do you really think raising prices is the way to compete with electronics vying for children's attention? I mean, if you think about it, a $30 Weaponizer is half the cost of a console video game, or the cost of a handheld video-game. A kid might grab both and think, "Well, this toy is awesome, but... this game will give me hours more entertainment, and I can only buy one... so..."

As a collector, I agree with you that the inflation should drive the price up, and we should pay more for good quality products if Hasbro has higher production costs due to increased expense for material, work forces getting paid more, etc. But I just don't see how raising prices will help sell toys to children.

Plus, Hasbro has basically addressed all of this already:
1) MASTERPIECES cost more, and are higher quality - sold to adults.
2) Cyberverse cost least, lower quality - sold to kids.

I think Hasbro is fully aware that they cannot raise prices too high on these things... so when you say you can't stand collectors who don't wanna pay more? I think you hate a larger audience than just the collectors, because a LOT of people don't want to pay $16+ for TF toys.

My pet peeve is when a company "double dips" - the deluxe TF's cost more now AND are smaller. Did Hasbro have to do both? It'd be less of a shock if they eased us into the price increase and shrinkage...

So you DON'T understand inflation. How much was a Deluxe in 1984? About $10? $10 in 1984 dollars is equivalent to $22 today.

Even if you pay the highest price for a Deluxe today - $16.99 at TRU - that's equivalent to $7.50 in 1984 dollars.

Transformers today are smaller, more complex with more engineering and more moving parts, AND THEY COST LESS.

GuyIncognito wrote:So you DON'T understand inflation. How much was a Deluxe in 1984? About $10? $10 in 1984 dollars is equivalent to $22 today.

Even if you pay the highest price for a Deluxe today - $16.99 at TRU - that's equivalent to $7.50 in 1984 dollars.

Transformers today are smaller, more complex with more engineering and more moving parts, AND THEY COST LESS.

Gotta love comparing past and present dollars, so confusing upon first sight.

Put simply: we're seemingly paying more money for a product of lower absolute value (way to put one's foot in his mouth), all thanks to money lowering in absolute value; that's the definition of inflation. Alternatively phrased, we need to pay more money to reach a certain value than we had to in years past. Thank you, single year's worth of Economics Class.

To give an example of inflation at work: in The Netherlands, we used to have 1 cent coins way back when. However, they were abolished when it cost 3 cents to produce a 1 cent coin. The coin had a lower representative than absolute value, which isn't how money should work.

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:

GuyIncognito wrote:So you DON'T understand inflation. How much was a Deluxe in 1984? About $10? $10 in 1984 dollars is equivalent to $22 today.

Even if you pay the highest price for a Deluxe today - $16.99 at TRU - that's equivalent to $7.50 in 1984 dollars.

Transformers today are smaller, more complex with more engineering and more moving parts, AND THEY COST LESS.

Gotta love comparing past and present dollars, so confusing upon first sight.

Put simply: we're seemingly paying more money for a product of lower absolute value (way to put one's foot in his mouth), all thanks to money lowering in absolute value; that's the definition of inflation. Alternatively phrased, we need to pay more money to reach a certain value than we had to in years past. Thank you, single year's worth of Economics Class.

So glad I'm past economics. Absolutely hated that class.

There weren't any Deluxes in G1. Deluxe class (and systematic size classes in general) didn't come about until Beast Wars. The figure sizes of G1 and G2 were mostly random, based more on character subgroups than anything.

And I see we've been using an incorrect but related Economic term: devaluation of money. The point still stands however.

Sabrblade wrote:There weren't any Deluxes in G1. Deluxe class (and systematic size classes in general) didn't come about until Beast Wars. The figure sizes of G1 and G2 were mostly random, based more on character subgroups than anything.

I swear, you're starting to become like Sheldon.

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:I swear, you're starting to become like Sheldon.

Sabrblade wrote:

JelZe GoldRabbit wrote:I swear, you're starting to become like Sheldon.

It's true you know.

Yea, we didn't have deluxes back then, and even the Beast Wars Deluxes were often WAY bigger, or atleast made use of way more plastic, what with the multiple insect legs. As far as I know, deluxes in beast wars days were a STEAL, 15 bucks or so for something that could pass off as a voyager today in some cases (Movie Blackout). Maybe not entirely true, but close.

G1 Transformers and G2 were both expensive as hell as far as I can remember, although I was just a little kid. They did have lots of die cast metal though, so maybe thats why. There is also a difference here between manufacturer(supplier) and retailer. The profit margins are probably getting thinner, so retailers need to bump up prices for items that don't really have a shelf life and the target market is pretty much one that will often want whatever is available at the store anyway (kids).

According to http://pleasesavemerobots.blogspot.com/ ... pse.html...

in 1985 Optimus Prime retailed for $19.88: $43.35 in 2013 dollars,
Thrust retailed for $12.88, $28.08 in today's dollars,
Smokescreen was $9.88, which is $21.54 in 2013 dollars.

Conclusion: after adjusting for inflaction (because you ABSOLUTELY MUST adjust for inflation when comparing prices from different time periods), you can see that Transformers are SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER now than they were in 1984-85.

The absolute cost in dollars may have gone up, but our income levels have gone up EVEN MORE, so the real cost is down. In 1984, the median household income in the U.S. was about $20,000 and today it's about $50,000.

Another way to think about it: in 1984, someone making the median income could buy 2000 Smokescreens with what they make in a year. In 2013, someone making the median income could buy 3,333 Smokescreens (at $15 each). TF cost has increased, but income has increased even more, making the real cost lower.

GuyIncognito wrote:According to http://pleasesavemerobots.blogspot.com/ ... pse.html...

in 1985 Optimus Prime retailed for $19.88: $43.35 in 2013 dollars,
Thrust retailed for $12.88, $28.08 in today's dollars,
Smokescreen was $9.88, which is $21.54 in 2013 dollars.

Conclusion: after adjusting for inflaction (because you ABSOLUTELY MUST adjust for inflation when comparing prices from different time periods), you can see that Transformers are SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER now than they were in 1984-85.

The absolute cost in dollars may have gone up, but our income levels have gone up EVEN MORE, so the real cost is down. In 1984, the median household income in the U.S. was about $20,000 and today it's about $50,000.

I can see G1 prime being 41 bucks today. If it did come out today, thats a deluxe with an add-on trailer, and maybe sort of an exclusive with all the die cast parts (and stickers, making it more of an asian import )

Thrust is pretty much a voyager by today's standards, so its fair its about 25-30 dollars. And smockscreen was slightly bigger than a deluxe, so maybe 19 dollars, but then adding tax...

It all rounds out to about the same, exchanging things like die cast for better engineering... no?

To really get this right though, you would need to do a lot of industry research on their manufacturing cost, overhead, etc etc etc.