The Energon Pub

First: there is nothing generic/'Hasbroish' about Feral Rex

Second: that looks god awful! TFC's colour choices keep getting worse...

Oh tail turns into a weapon!! Hasbro would've never thought of that

mooncake623 wrote:Oh tail turns into a weapon!! Hasbro would've never thought of that

Presumably, sarcasm?

Arctorro wrote:First: there is nothing generic/'Hasbroish' about Feral Rex

Oh, I wasn't referring to the entire thing in combined mode, I meant the individual bots in their set. Their bodies/arms/legs just look a lot more Hasbro-ish to me, the same with their very rectangular looking beast modes. Nothing wrong with it I suppose, it's just not my thing. These guys (TFC's) just seem to have a slightly wilder/more organic look to them that I'm digging is all.

xyl360 wrote:

Arctorro wrote:First: there is nothing generic/'Hasbroish' about Feral Rex

Oh, I wasn't referring to the entire thing in combined mode, I meant the individual bots in their set. Their bodies/arms/legs just look a lot more Hasbro-ish to me, the same with their very rectangular looking beast modes. Nothing wrong with it I suppose, it's just not my thing. These guys (TFC's) just seem to have a slightly wilder/more organic look to them that I'm digging is all.

Nor was I referring to the entire thing in combined mode.

The term "Hasbro-ish" is idiotic considering the range of cartoons/toy lines there have been over they years. It could be applied to any and every 3P figure/upgrade kit ever made based purely on the variety of figures Hasbro has released since G1. I also see it as a generic way for someone to knock something they don't like when they can't think of anything reasonable to say (there is nothing wrong with not liking something for some unexplainable reason), but you do have valid reasons for not liking them, so why add that bs term as well?

Personally I don't think they wilder just more like something that'd be sold to kids under 5. They may look a little more organic, but this is a G1 update not Beast Wars, so that (for me) is irrelevant. But that doesn't make them "Hasbro-ish", it just means I'd prefer something else.

Sorry if I offend, that wasn't my intent, but that term is one this community really needs to leave behind.

megatronus wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:Oh tail turns into a weapon!! Hasbro would've never thought of that

Presumably, sarcasm?

Yes it is, since you know using the tail of a beast mode as a whip weapon is kind of a thing they do

Arctorro wrote:

xyl360 wrote:

Arctorro wrote:First: there is nothing generic/'Hasbroish' about Feral Rex

Oh, I wasn't referring to the entire thing in combined mode, I meant the individual bots in their set. Their bodies/arms/legs just look a lot more Hasbro-ish to me, the same with their very rectangular looking beast modes. Nothing wrong with it I suppose, it's just not my thing. These guys (TFC's) just seem to have a slightly wilder/more organic look to them that I'm digging is all.

Nor was I referring to the entire thing in combined mode.

The term "Hasbro-ish" is idiotic considering the range of cartoons/toy lines there have been over they years. It could be applied to any and every 3P figure/upgrade kit ever made based purely on the variety of figures Hasbro has released since G1. I also see it as a generic way for someone to knock something they don't like when they can't think of anything reasonable to say (there is nothing wrong with not liking something for some unexplainable reason), but you do have valid reasons for not liking them, so why add that bs term as well?

Personally I don't think they wilder just more like something that'd be sold to kids under 5. They may look a little more organic, but this is a G1 update not Beast Wars, so that (for me) is irrelevant. But that doesn't make them "Hasbro-ish", it just means I'd prefer something else.

Sorry if I offend, that wasn't my intent, but that term is one this community really needs to leave behind.

Please, don't try to back out of your comments and look to be civil under the guise of 'not meaning to offend' after using terms like 'idiotic'.

I was referring to MMC's figures' resemblance to modern Generations figures if you must know. That's all I meant by Hasbro-ish. Call it what you will, but that's how I see them. When MMC first started promoting their version of Predaking with their teasers, all the pics depicted these amazing, dynamic, wild looking things, but now that they've made so many compromises from their original vision for whatever reason, they now appear to be a lot more generic. At least to me. I was excited about them when I saw their initial teasers from that Transformers convention and couldn't wait to get my preorder in. That is until I saw what they'd actually come up with when they started showing off the actual figures in plastic. Then, when I saw what TFC were doing with theirs, which was much closer to what I'd imagined MMC's turning out like based on their initial teasers, I went with them instead.

It's that simple.

It's not a knock on MMC's figures that they look (to me at least) like something Hasbro would create. If anything it just means that they'll fit in much better than TFC's on a Generations/Classics shelf. I just had hopes for a more extreme design and that's what I feel TFC is providing.

xyl360 wrote:Please, don't try to back out of your comments and look to be civil under the guise of 'not meaning to offend' after using terms like 'idiotic'.

I'm not backing out of anything. My view on the term "Hasbro-ish" is one that can easily offend and I wanted to get my opinion across but didn't want to piss off anyone, which considering my opinion with this is almost impossible to do. But if you don't want me to apologise for a rude comment, then I'm fine with that

xyl360 wrote:I was referring to MMC's figures' resemblance to modern Generations figures if you must know. That's all I meant by Hasbro-ish. Call it what you will, but that's how I see them. When MMC first started promoting their version of Predaking with their teasers, all the pics depicted these amazing, dynamic, wild looking things, but now that they've made so many compromises from their original vision for whatever reason, they now appear to be a lot more generic. At least to me. I was excited about them when I saw their initial teasers from that Transformers convention and couldn't wait to get my preorder in. That is until I saw what they'd actually come up with when they started showing off the actual figures in plastic. Then, when I saw what TFC were doing with theirs, which was much closer to what I'd imagined MMC's turning out like based on their initial teasers, I went with them instead.

It's that simple.

It's not a knock on MMC's figures that they look (to me at least) like something Hasbro would create. If anything it just means that they'll fit in much better than TFC's on a Generations/Classics shelf. I just had hopes for a more extreme design and that's what I feel TFC is providing.

Our tastes on Ares and Feral Rex couldn't possibly be any more opposite, but when it comes to one looking more Hasbro-ish let me quote:

mooncake623 wrote:

megatronus wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:Oh tail turns into a weapon!! Hasbro would've never thought of that

Presumably, sarcasm?

Yes it is, since you know using the tail of a beast mode as a whip weapon is kind of a thing they do

An argument can be made for Ares being the one that looks more like Hasbro's generations figures. I appreciate your reasons for preferring Ares over Feral Rex, I was just trying to point out how calling anything "Hasbro-ish" can be seen in a certain light. Look at everything that has been released since 2006 that could be brought under the "Classics" banner (regardless of their actual line) and see just how much they have changed (not counting undersized Deluxes) and tell me if one would be better on a Classics shelf.

We see these very differently, you think the Ares guys look wilder and more dynamic while I think that of Feral Rex, which is why it's great we have options. The thing is, just because the FR beast modes make you think of the current line of Hasbro figures doesn't make them Hasbro-ish, because next year they might look nothing like what Hasbro is making, and I'm not sure they look like anything Hasbro was making last year. Your line "MMC's figures' resemblance to modern Generations figures" makes perfect sense and doesn't generalise FR with everything Hasbro has ever made, which is what Hasbro-ish says.

I'd apologise for derailing the thread, but apparently I shouldn't do that ( ), so I'll end my rant here and let things return to normal.

Arctorro wrote:

xyl360 wrote:Please, don't try to back out of your comments and look to be civil under the guise of 'not meaning to offend' after using terms like 'idiotic'.

I'm not backing out of anything. My view on the term "Hasbro-ish" is one that can easily offend and I wanted to get my opinion across but didn't want to piss off anyone, which considering my opinion with this is almost impossible to do. But if you don't want me to apologise for a rude comment, then I'm fine with that

The point is, if it weren't a rude comment (which you yourself just admitted that it was), then how can you claim that it's not intended to offend? It's just as simple to say that the term "Hasbro-ish" is quite vague in your view and that it's perhaps not as descriptive of precisely what my (or anyone else who uses the term) means when they say it. Of course, that's why I expanded on it because aside from your use of the terms "idiotic" and "bs", the rest of your comments made it quite clear why you had issues with the term (and all without resorting to any rudeness, go figure).

Arctorro wrote:

xyl360 wrote:I was referring to MMC's figures' resemblance to modern Generations figures if you must know. That's all I meant by Hasbro-ish. Call it what you will, but that's how I see them. When MMC first started promoting their version of Predaking with their teasers, all the pics depicted these amazing, dynamic, wild looking things, but now that they've made so many compromises from their original vision for whatever reason, they now appear to be a lot more generic. At least to me. I was excited about them when I saw their initial teasers from that Transformers convention and couldn't wait to get my preorder in. That is until I saw what they'd actually come up with when they started showing off the actual figures in plastic. Then, when I saw what TFC were doing with theirs, which was much closer to what I'd imagined MMC's turning out like based on their initial teasers, I went with them instead.

It's that simple.

It's not a knock on MMC's figures that they look (to me at least) like something Hasbro would create. If anything it just means that they'll fit in much better than TFC's on a Generations/Classics shelf. I just had hopes for a more extreme design and that's what I feel TFC is providing.

Our tastes on Ares and Feral Rex couldn't possibly be any more opposite, but when it comes to one looking more Hasbro-ish let me quote:

mooncake623 wrote:

megatronus wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:Oh tail turns into a weapon!! Hasbro would've never thought of that

Presumably, sarcasm?

Yes it is, since you know using the tail of a beast mode as a whip weapon is kind of a thing they do

An argument can be made for Ares being the one that looks more like Hasbro's generations figures. I appreciate your reasons for preferring Ares over Feral Rex, I was just trying to point out how calling anything "Hasbro-ish" can be seen in a certain light. Look at everything that has been released since 2006 that could be brought under the "Classics" banner (regardless of their actual line) and see just how much they have changed (not counting undersized Deluxes) and tell me if one would be better on a Classics shelf.

We see these very differently, you think the Ares guys look wilder and more dynamic while I think that of Feral Rex, which is why it's great we have options. The thing is, just because the FR beast modes make you think of the current line of Hasbro figures doesn't make them Hasbro-ish, because next year they might look nothing like what Hasbro is making, and I'm not sure they look like anything Hasbro was making last year. Your line "MMC's figures' resemblance to modern Generations figures" makes perfect sense and doesn't generalise FR with everything Hasbro has ever made, which is what Hasbro-ish says.

I'd apologise for derailing the thread, but apparently I shouldn't do that ( ), so I'll end my rant here and let things return to normal.

My issue wasn't with the apology, it was with the fact that you could have easily omitted the very words you felt the need to apologize for and you wouldn't have needed to apologize at all and your points would have still been just as clear and just as valid (and yes, I did just call your points valid, which was why I did take the time to respond with my reasoning for feeling that the figures looked "Hasbro-ish".

Besides that, yes, absolutely, those tail weapons are very "Hasbro-ish". My point was merely about the overall looks of the figures, especially the limbs and the beast modes.

I like Ares' better, but can see why many don't feel the same. It's like Coke vs Pepsi, some like one, some like the other. Neither is right (and some just drink water ). I was simply giving my reasoning for why I happen to like Ares better and you chose to go on the offensive because I used a term you don't care for. I don't have a problem with you expressing your opinion about the terminology I used and I understand what you're saying. It was those two words/phrases you used (which you yourself felt the need to apologize for, so clearly you yourself saw something wrong with them as well) that I had issue with, nothing more.

Look, it's the internet, I get it. Everyone's going to have their own opinions about things. I don't expect you to like TFC's version any more than you expect me to like MMC's. I was simply voicing some of the reasons that I happen to like this set over the other. There was no need to call the things I said "idiotic" or "bs" just because you happen to not like it when someone uses that particular phrasing. It has a meaning to me and I still stand by it. When I see MMC's Preds, I think "hmm, Hasbro" and I don't think that when I look at TFC's. It's that simple. It doesn't mean that I think or expect anyone else to see the same thing. Hell, it's not even an insult. Most of the figures that line my shelves which I've spent tens of thousands of dollars on are Hasbro/Takara TFs, so I obviously don't have a problem with figures which are absolutely "Hasbro-ish". But the entire reason I was excited about a third party Predaking was because of what MMC showed off in the beginning with their teasers, and I don't feel that they delivered on what their early concept drawings illustrated while I do feel that what TFC made is closer at least in spirit to what it represented, at least to me. It doesn't mean I'm right, it doesn't mean that MMC's isn't great or even "superior", it just means that I wish what I saw early on came to be in plastic, and I don't feel like it did, but when I saw TFC's, it looked to me that in a way at least, it hit much closer to the mark.

It's like FoC Bruticus. You look at him in the game and he looks pretty decent. Many would argue that what Has/Tak delivered was a pathetic, far cry from what the game showed. And now we have third party sets to 'enhance' it by making it actually look a lot more like it did in the game. You can bet that many of the individuals who will be purchasing those sets will be doing so because they saw Bruticus in the game, saw and possibly own one or more of the Has/Tak versions of Bruticus and want to make that particular set/figure deliver on the design they were shown in the game.

This is how I see these third party Predakings. I was shown something that I really liked, the final product didn't live up to my expectations, so I found an alternative that is closer to what I had in mind when I saw those initial teasers. That's the biggest reason I chose this one, which has more to do with MMC's early solicitations than anything else. They made me want THAT Predaking and it looks to me like they delivered something totally different. Not bad, just different. And it's different enough that once I saw this one (Ares), I cancelled my preorders for MMC's and started ordering TFC's.

To be fair to MMC, their final product isn't all that different from their early teaser, except for Tigris, which seems to have undergone the most drastic changes. It definitely looked better with those curved shoulder armors

http://www.bigbadtoystore.com/bbts/product.aspx?product=TFCT10002&mode=retail&utm_source=Marketing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Marketing&utm_content=

BBTS preorder for ARES - PHLOGEUS

mooncake623 wrote:BBTS preorder for ARES - PHLOGEUS

Gesundheit (What a name!)

guarayakha wrote:To be fair to MMC, their final product isn't all that different from their early teaser, except for Tigris, which seems to have undergone the most drastic changes. It definitely looked better with those curved shoulder armors

Yeah, with those brightened (thank you Photoshop ) images, I see what you mean. I dunno, maybe when I saw the original images (the first teasers before they got brightened up/clarified by Photoshop users to reveal more of the hidden details) I just got a mistaken impression about these guys. It's certainly no fault of MMC's, but I was definitely expecting something totally different and I'm liking what TFC are doing. Especially after seeing their not-Rampage (already preordered now of course).

I'm half tempted to get 2 sets of TFC's the same as I did with FP's Stunticons just so I can have one set combined and one in beast mode. I'm just loving the style of this set.

Arctorro wrote:

I know others will disagree with me, but: ewww.

megatronus wrote:

Arctorro wrote:

I know others will disagree with me, but: ewww.

Oh, I agree with you. I'm not really feeling it.

megatronus wrote:

Arctorro wrote:

I know others will disagree with me, but: ewww.

I agree, he just doesn't look right.

Arctorro wrote:

megatronus wrote:

Arctorro wrote:

I know others will disagree with me, but: ewww.

I agree, he just doesn't look right.

Looks too dumpy.

Question to people who knows. I've heard these phrases used by lots of people in the fandom to describe the way a transformer looks and I've never understand what that means.

Dumpy (from above poster)
Durpy? (hear this all the time from reviewers and posters)
wumpy? (what does this even mean?)

Just curious cause I really don't understand

Thanks in advance.

mooncake623 wrote:Dumpy (from above poster)

Dumpy is an actual word, you can find it in an English language dictionary. It means a person who is short and stout. Alternately, it means a building or room that is ugly, dirty, and run-down.

The first meaning is the one I mean when I speak of this figure.

Midnight_Fox wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:Dumpy (from above poster)

Dumpy is an actual word, you can find it in an English language dictionary. It means a person who is short and stout. Alternately, it means a building or room that is ugly, dirty, and run-down.

The first meaning is the one I mean when I speak of this figure.

Ah thanks! I know dumpy is a word but I am not sure of the context you were using it in cause I never thought that this figure looked short and stout so I thought it might have meant something else

mooncake623 wrote:Question to people who knows. I've heard these phrases used by lots of people in the fandom to describe the way a transformer looks and I've never understand what that means.

Dumpy (from above poster)
Durpy? (hear this all the time from reviewers and posters)
wumpy? (what does this even mean?)

Just curious cause I really don't understand

Thanks in advance.

Durpy is a way to get around saying the "r" word or that it's "special."

mooncake623 wrote:
Ah thanks! I know dumpy is a word but I am not sure of the context you were using it in cause I never thought that this figure looked short and stout so I thought it might have meant something else

It's that particular picture that makes him look dumpy: short looking limbs matched to a barrel chest and broad, large shoulders. I'm not sure the legs are fully extended, but something about the angle makes him look that way to me.

megatronus wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:Question to people who knows. I've heard these phrases used by lots of people in the fandom to describe the way a transformer looks and I've never understand what that means.

Dumpy (from above poster)
Durpy? (hear this all the time from reviewers and posters)
wumpy? (what does this even mean?)

Just curious cause I really don't understand

Thanks in advance.

Durpy is a way to get around saying the "r" word or that it's "special."

Ahhh ok thanks!

blah...