Shadowman wrote:This is Sabrblade we're talking about. His ability to store trivial information about TV shows is downright superhuman.
Caelus wrote:My wife pointed out something interesting about the prehistoric Predacons. I said that everyone was complaining because transforming for them mostly consisted of them just standing up-right. She essentially said, 'So? That's what our ancestors did.'
Sentinel_Primal wrote:Based off the images just released of Snapdragon on Dengeki Hobby, I think it's safe to say the majority of his white plastic will be like Apeface's. That's not a problem for me as I didn't mind the plastic, but it's something a couple of people really hated. Still looking forward to getting this figure to complete the Horrorcons
aronjlove wrote:Are these pics or renders, as the white seems more matte than shiny on Apeface and these images make it look shiny.
Well luckily for you, that's just an optical illusion. Having looked at both the video and the toy fair pics, there's a very definite space between them all the way up.Bounti76 wrote:My only issue with his bird mode is the legs- not how skinny they are, but how closely together they seem to be the closer they get to the body.
That can happen with any Transformer with poseable legs, especially when they have a wide upper body.Bounti76 wrote:At some angles, it looks like they almost meet at the same point, like a kid drew and designed then.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:@blackeyedprime Or maybe they'll do something sly and redeco Snapdragon in red, gray, and black.
1. Reality check time: Most of those triple-changer animal designs had the reverse problem - the vehicle mode was fairly obviously made of animal bits.AllNewSuperRobot wrote: The Beast Modes of both are disappointing however, there's no escaping that. We've had five years of the Beast Era, experimenting and refining Transforming [triple changer] animal designs, since their initial G1 debut. That knowhow should have been brought into play to streamline their modern designs. That didn't happen and therein lies the disparity.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:1. Reality check time: Most of those triple-changer animal designs had the reverse problem - the vehicle mode was fairly obviously made of animal bits.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:2. Bear in mind the fact that Apeface and Snapdragon have the constraint of still needing to look like their G1 selves, whereas the Beast Warriors had more organic limb shapes.
AllNewSuperRobot wrote:That is also a redundant excuse. They still have to strictly adhere to their 80's designs, yet Generations Springer, Trypticon, Omega Supreme or even Earthrise Prime don't? Why is that??
Ah. Well, you're still wrong. Because those lessons have been applied.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Actual reality check: I'm not talking about figures from 1998. I'm talking about the creative process has come a long way since the 80's. The Beast Era refined Beast Mode designs. Transmetals themselves had vehicle augments but none of them went as far as completely changing into a car, osprey etc (Waspinator was probably the closest to a "true" Triple-Former).ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:1. Reality check time: Most of those triple-changer animal designs had the reverse problem - the vehicle mode was fairly obviously made of animal bits.
What the actual hell are you talking about? Every. Last. One. of those toys you mentioned looks like their '80s self. The engineering has been vastly improved (although in Prime's case I'm tempted to say he's over-engineered), but they still look like the blocky designs of the cartoon and comics of yore.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:That is also a redundant excuse. They still have to strictly adhere to their 80's designs, yet Generations Springer, Trypticon, Omega Supreme or even Earthrise Prime don't? Why is that??ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:2. Bear in mind the fact that Apeface and Snapdragon have the constraint of still needing to look like their G1 selves, whereas the Beast Warriors had more organic limb shapes.
Get this through your skull: We're talking about the VISUAL design, not the transformation engineering.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Quite a large chunk of SIEGE would disagree with a "strict adherence to 80's designs" being enforced at all.
Speaking as someone who owns both versions of Trypticon, the transformation engineering on him isn't all that different. He's a lot more articulated, but the basic transformation scheme is largely the same. And with Scorponok, it looks like the most substantial difference is that his scorpion legs tuck away in robot mode.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Also, back to Beast Formers, Trypticon retains his visual identity, yet has a completely updated design. As also suggested by the images for the new Scorponok.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:Ah. Well, you're still wrong. Because those lessons have been applied.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Actual reality check: I'm not talking about figures from 1998. I'm talking about the creative process has come a long way since the 80's. The Beast Era refined Beast Mode designs. Transmetals themselves had vehicle augments but none of them went as far as completely changing into a car, osprey etc (Waspinator was probably the closest to a "true" Triple-Former).ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:1. Reality check time: Most of those triple-changer animal designs had the reverse problem - the vehicle mode was fairly obviously made of animal bits.
AllNewSuperRobot wrote:That is also a redundant excuse. They still have to strictly adhere to their 80's designs, yet Generations Springer, Trypticon, Omega Supreme or even Earthrise Prime don't? Why is that??ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:2. Bear in mind the fact that Apeface and Snapdragon have the constraint of still needing to look like their G1 selves, whereas the Beast Warriors had more organic limb shapes.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The engineering has been vastly improved (although in Prime's case I'm tempted to say he's over-engineered), but they still look like the blocky designs of the cartoon and comics of yore.
And Apeface and Snapdragon have seen similar improvements in engineering, as outlined in the last part of my post.
ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:Get this through your skull: We're talking about the VISUAL design, not the transformation engineering.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Quite a large chunk of SIEGE would disagree with a "strict adherence to 80's designs" being enforced at all.
Nope, you're the one who's wrong. Apeface's gorilla chest no longer sticks out a mile past his head and the gorilla head itself is better proportioned. Snapdragon no longer has robot leg tumors on his dino chest, his T. rex limbs are better proportioned and mounted where they should be (and more articulate), his neck actually looks like a neck and not just a block flipped out, and he has a bigger and more distinct head.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:Ah. Well, you're still wrong. Because those lessons have been applied.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Actual reality check: I'm not talking about figures from 1998. I'm talking about the creative process has come a long way since the 80's. The Beast Era refined Beast Mode designs. Transmetals themselves had vehicle augments but none of them went as far as completely changing into a car, osprey etc (Waspinator was probably the closest to a "true" Triple-Former).ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:1. Reality check time: Most of those triple-changer animal designs had the reverse problem - the vehicle mode was fairly obviously made of animal bits.
No, incorrect again. Because "Mecha-Godzilla" and "Mecha-King Kong" still look no closer to what they originally pay homage to
How, exactly? Outline what you want here. Give me a laundry list of the further improvements you want made and how they'd fit in.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:and in 2019/2020, they could quite easily.
You are talking out your exhaust port on that one so hard it's not even funny. Several Prime Wars and WFC molds carry visual cues to such an extent that they have molded detail BASED ON THE 80s TOYS' STICKERS.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:The new figures I mentioned still carry their visual identity, but the entire point I am making is one of creative design and engineering. Omega Supreme, still looks like himself, but he doesn't still carry visual cues from his 80s toy.ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:The engineering has been vastly improved (although in Prime's case I'm tempted to say he's over-engineered), but they still look like the blocky designs of the cartoon and comics of yore.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:That is also a redundant excuse. They still have to strictly adhere to their 80's designs, yet Generations Springer, Trypticon, Omega Supreme or even Earthrise Prime don't? Why is that??ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:2. Bear in mind the fact that Apeface and Snapdragon have the constraint of still needing to look like their G1 selves, whereas the Beast Warriors had more organic limb shapes.
And Apeface and Snapdragon have seen similar improvements in engineering, as outlined in the last part of my post.
They did, and you're utterly failing to see it.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:The Horrorcon bot modes are good. Jet modes, a swing (Snapdragon) and a miss (Apeface). The Beast Modes are not good enough and they are more than capable of being so. You would think given they are two unique molds, HasTak would have put the effort in to their complete designs.
The only thing that's true of is Apeface's jet mode.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Instead they gave a clear focus on certain modes at the expense of others.
You sure seemed to be talking about engineering, what with remarks like " but the entire point I am making is one of creative design and engineering".AllNewSuperRobot wrote:ZeldaTheSwordsman wrote:Get this through your skull: We're talking about the VISUAL design, not the transformation engineering.AllNewSuperRobot wrote:Quite a large chunk of SIEGE would disagree with a "strict adherence to 80's designs" being enforced at all.
I wasn't. So if you didn't understand from the very beginning, maybe best to say as much? Or nothing?
Return to Transformers Toys Discussion
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Glyph, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], MSN [Bot]