The Energon Pub

[s250]

[Bumblebeast]

Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.

[Mechas8n]

Quadruple changer!? Nice Well, the toy is only triple, but with all those modes I am disappointed that there's no "Devastators bonce" mode.

Big freaking hands!

[Megatron Wolf]

Cool transformation, and a tankish looking mode....... ok im sold. Now i need to think of name for it. Damn im running out. Last movie took most of em.

[Serpent O - R]

Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.

I absolutely agree... and with Devastator's Fist.

[dabattousai]

Battle mode. Great. And where is the "Devastator's head" mode? F*** Hasbro.

My thoughts exactly....

[Ultra Markus]

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

[Street-Convoy S0S]

I wonder if its just one construction who has the whole instructions on making devistator. cuss he looks easy to make the face.

[Autobot032]

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

Isn't it?

This actually angers me, because they flat out lied to us. They said something would be sacrificed in either Devastator, or the individuals if they had to combine, so they came up with both sets. Well that's not even remotely true, now that we see his instructions. 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.

Scrap the stupid third modes and make them combine. Geez. What a friggin' rip off.

Ya know, I'd have respected them far more if they had said "Look, we want to cash in, so there will be two versions of the Constructicons. Hey, at least we're honest."

We got a bunch of spin and dodged questions.

How friggin' rude.

[harvester]

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]

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.)

[El Duque]

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.)

Forget the kids give me a proper Devastator!

[Counterpunch]

Where were you guys yesterday when I was getting kicked in the balls for suggesting that we should be getting a full 3 mode set of Constructicons?

Teamwork people! Teamwork!

[Bumblebeast]

Anyways, I hope that a third party comes up with a clever form to make them combine. I'll probably get the individual constructicons, but not that Voltron thing.

[Wheeljack144]

Jackhammer mode is all sorts of stupid, but this battle mode looks pretty cool. Demolisher's motorcycle mode as decent too, but I would prefer if he had legs.

[Warbreaker]

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.)

Nicely put together! Some people just can't seem to get around the fact that Hasbro wasn't created to purely satisfy the wants of adult collectors, otherwise it would have run into the ground of bankruptcy a long time ago. Of course it tries to fulfill some of our wishes, but the decisions it chooses, for better or for worse, are ultimately it's own to choose, not ours.

Well, that nice cross-sectional view of Mixmaster's cement barrel (panel 4) automatically disproves any hint/capability of a vacuum maw. I'm not staring too deeply at the instructions, this stuff is serious joy-killing spoilers for me. I...like his third mode? It's a cool turret, what with the appropriately-placed cement-barrel parts acting as shields and the BFG poking out in the middle, but it's not a really a selling point in my eyes (it seems to consist of his bot-mode doing yoga in the instructions), since the robot mode and alt-mode are still extremely awesome, I consider it to be some sort of 'bonus' mode like Energon Scorponok's 'jet' mode. Seems to me that his BFG can only be swung over his head with some difficulty, so it's a bit of a letdown. Ah well, I still like Bonecrusher v2.0 plenty.

[El Duque]

Seriously what kid in their right mind would want a Devastator set with three full modes

I just don't buy the arguement that we aren't getting a combining Devy with individual transformable figures is because these are meant for kids. Would it be complex? I'm sure it would be, but so are a lot of the figures that have been marketed to kids. If I were a kid right now I would still be pissed about this. I don't even like kids, but I will give them enough credit that they can handle a full three mode Devy.

[Autobot032]

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.

Not a bad idea, but not the one we're getting. Devastator appears at the end of the film, atop the Pyramids in Giza. You see Demolishor in robot mode (alone) in the opening sequence in China.

So, they start out separate and then combine towards the end.

Not a bad idea though, seriously.

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.)

Unreasonable? US? Are you serious? What the... NO! We're not being unreasonable!

The toys are already complex enough as is. (Mixmaster's instructions actually gave me a bit of a headache...) Gut the the third mode, and in it's place make a combiner connection. Same amount of difficulty as is right now, but with the ability to combine. How is that asking too much of them? I think you're missing the point there.

You want to know what's really unreasonable?

Paying $99.50 for a transforming set of figures that don't combine.
Plus another $100.00 for a set that does, but has no individual robot modes.

$199.50 to have the ultimate set of ROTF Constructicons is absolutely, without a doubt, 110% unreasonable. You talk about figure difficulty for kids, well what about affordability problems for kids?

With the economy as it is right now, most kids won't be able to afford more than two figures (or one Voyager), parents certainly won't be willing to shell out more, and even some of us have cut down our TF spending.

That's unreasonable. Asking for an intricate combiner (when we know they've had the technology for years) is not only reasonable, it's fiscally responsible. (And I say that with a straight face, because it's true.)

Hasbro went beyond reason a long time ago. This is just icing on the cake.

Oh and btw...kids are going to want a set of Constructions that form Devastator just as much as we do, and when they figure out the Devastator they bought is nothing more than a glorified Megazord, when the film creation was the six robots, they're not only going to be confused, but they're gonna be pissed.

Don't dumb kids down, they're far smarter and more capable than you give them credit for. I've seen kids take Rubik's Cube-esque TFs and figure out how to transform them no problem.

Unreasonable? Right.

[El Duque]

Good points!

[starfish]

I'm on the side of Hasbro here. I mean, look at the engineering on that thing; it's an intricate transformation to be sure. How the hell are Hasbro supposed to stash Devastator's face in there as well, given that the mixer barrel unfolds in at least six different directions already?

Demolishor has the same problem. He transforms into a spindly, ungainly robot that's all arms and wheels. The other version (with no robot mode) unfolds in all sorts of other different ways to form a solid torso.

I know Hasbro are usually really good at designing great transformations, but they can't pull a genie out of a bottle. There's simply no way on earth you can get those body parts AND a movie-accurate robot mode out of the same toy, especially if you want Devastator to have some kind of articulation as well.

Given the above, I think that Hasbro's solution is a rather elegant and clever compromise.

[doomseer]

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?

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.

'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!

[Autobot032]

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?

Thank you for an excellent point. Awesome.

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.

Exactly. Again, awesome.

'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.

Exactly. This is an excellent point, and thank you for the informative lesson on the toys there. I had no idea they were marketed at a teenager. Oh and again, awesome.

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!

YES, YES, a million times YES. Thank you! This is all about making some money and putting the screws to us. They've killed Universe 2.0, and put Animated on a very limited release this year to bring in ROTF and a good portion of the figures aren't even accepted by hardcore fans. Yet they're making TWO of the same character to the tune of $200.00 and people of all ages are expected to fork over for it.

That's highway robbery, and it's been their plan all along. I can't wait for some 3rd party company like Fanprojects (or whatever it's called) to make a combiner accessory set that allows the current figures to combine like the official "Megazord kit" coming in August from Hasbro.

Your entire post was made of win.

[El Duque]

While it would be great if some third party company made a kit that would allow the individual figures to combine I doubt it happens. You can bet as soon as these get released kit-bashers will get right to work using both sets to make a working version that transformers and combines.

[WarzoneBeta]

umm... guys i just found out something the weapons combine i think i just was looking at the pics and i can see a connection in a combined cybertronian vehical form... i think we'll be getting devys alt mode with these figures i kid you not look at the figs very closely all we need now is to see the other figs and then ill know.

[starfish]

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?

Thay managed it in the 80s, because times were simpler then. "Fold the wings back and insert robot hand into post" is probably not a transformation that would be acceptable in today's more complex toy market.

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.

As I've said in other posts already, I completely agree on this point. I'm sure that if Hasbro gor their brains in gear, with today's technology they could make the most kick-ass combiner ever seen.

The problem, however, is in making a combiner that matches what we see on screen. When Hasbro were designing Landfill or Superion Maximus, they had complete design freedom, and as such we were rewarded with some pretty cool toys (although Landfill, to be fair, wasn't very stable or articulated).

It's all very well Hasbro making a good combiner toy - but it's a whole nother matter to make something that both functions as a toy AND matches the CGI characters we see on-screen.

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.

Aparrently, this combiniation is nothing more technical than Prime wearing Jetfire as a backpack. If you think that's complicated, then I hope you had fun with your Action Masters.

'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!

Firstly, what the hell's wrong with that? I mean, they are a company aren't they? They exist to make profits, don't they? So what is exactly is your beef with Hasbro trying to make profits by selling toys?

Besides, as I've said before, I personally think that Hasbro would have made a fully-functioning set of Combiners if it were possible. Given the technical demands of a screen-accurate Devastator, I think Hasbro's decision is a good compromise.