Demo Videos of Transformers: Age of Extinction Kre-O Sets Demo Videos

Wolfman Jake wrote:Again, yes, each plastic injection mold lasts for only so many uses, but that's not the point.

I want to preface my response by saying that I'm largely unaware of the history of this discussion forum, so I have no idea how many times or to what extent this subject has been discussed. I'm not even sure if you were replying to me directly or not. If I'm completely misunderstanding your position, I apologize in advance, but I do take strong issue with some of the things you're saying.

Hasbro and Takara can make more molds when the old ones are used up. Mold "degradation" is a fandom boogeyman. It's not a real issue, especially not in this age of manufacturing technology.

I don't see how this line of reasoning follows. Production molds have a finite life span. They are made of metal alloys with limited tensile strength. They can only endure so many production runs before they begin to show signs of heavy wear.

Most toys enjoy a small, comfortable production run of perhaps 100,000 or 200,000 and then their production molds are recycled. That's the industry standard. More rarely, the molds will be pressed into service multiple times. Now, obviously, there are alternative styles of mass-production (LEGO has been producing essentially the same bricks since the 1970's; Mattel's line of Barbie dolls or Hot Wheels cars are, by and large, all the same doll with different clothing or same car with different paint) but typically, a toy represents a unique character, enjoys a unique sculpt, and is quietly retired from service.

Transformers really is the exception to the rule. In recent years we've gotten new versions of toys that have been around since the G1 days, or earlier, and have already been produced dozens of times over. That's not normal. If you study the toys closely, particularly the ones with multiple mold-mates, there is almost always evidence of mold degradation.

There's no such thing as using a "mold" too much and then it's gone forever.

Then is there some other reason you're aware of why Takara has never been able to provide us with G1 reissues of Mirage and Sunstreaker and the Dinobots? Not being confrontational; I'm genuinely asking the question.

Molds made in late 70's and early 80's are likely more costly for Hasbro and Takara to reproduce, so they stretch as much as they can from each, and you get wonky reissues like the G1 Combaticons.

The Combaticons are a great example of this phenomenon because those poor toys have been trotted out so many damn times:

1) G1 Japan edition (launching Onslaught)
2) G1 die-cast versions (neutered launcher)
3) G1 plastic versions
4) Euro Classics (no rub symbol indents)
5) Battle Gaia
6) G2 editions
7) Car Robots Valdigus
8] Robots in Disguise Ruination
9) Armada all-grey "Urban Camo"
10) Wal-Mart "Tiger Force"
11) Takara G1 reissues

The molds were subjected to many modifications and tweaks over the years that it's not even funny. By the time the toys finally came full circle, you got G1 reissues with almost completely different functionality than the vintage G1 units. Some of the changes had nothing to do with mold degradation (adding weapon mounts for G2 Onslaught; giving the Car Robots weapons the ability to combine together) but some changes are absolutely the result of mold fatigue. There are pock marks all over the reissue Combaticons where the molds have begun to degrade. Weapons and accessories no longer fit correctly (Swindle can't hold his own pistol; Bruticus's chest plate no longer locks down).

Now, obviously, a lot of the toys that we get nowadays don't have such a long and sordid history because there aren't too many Transformers on store shelves that have been made available since 1986. We're going to get a new version of Beast Wars Terrorsaur pretty soon (in the form of a one-headed Age of Extinction Strafe), though, who is only a decade younger than the Combaticons, and whose production mold has also seen repeated use. I'll be very interested to get that toy and study it.

Like I said, "mold degradation" is a boogeyman to transformers fans. It's an often blamed but poorly understood phenomenon that helps people place blame somewhere for their unsatisfactory toys because they don't know better.

If there's a long history of fans blaming poorly-designed or badly-engineered toys on simple mold fatigue, I'm not aware of it. I won't speak to that point. With that said, mold degradation is a real phenomenon, demonstrable and measurable, and it surprises me that you're the second person I've encountered now who seems to think it doesn't exist.

A final thought for any who think that manufacturing replacement molds or even reverse-engineering toys back into useable molds for mass production is prohibitively expensive for Takara and Hasbro: Why is the market for high quality knock-offs so profitable?

The short answer is because Zhong Jin is exploiting a consumer demand that the official sources have failed to address.

Of course, Zhong Jin toys don't have to conform to safety regulations, are not subject to drop testing, and don't have to go through trademark approval. They don't pay licensing fees. Perhaps most significantly, they take shortcuts. Some of their products are quite excellent but some of them do not meet the standards of quality I would expect from a genuine Hasbro or Takara product.

My counter-question(s) to you would be: If reverse-engineering molds isn't too expensive for Hasbro or Takara to consider, then why don't they just do it all the time? Why does Hasbro always, always wait for Takara to spend the money to test and/or restore a mold before they reissue a toy themselves? Why are so many reissues of older toys, especially ones with many mold-mates, always riddled with production flaws that did not exist on the original releases? Why would Takara spend the money to retool things like G1 Jazz's face or Cliffjumper's face if it weren't necessary? Can you offer some alternate explanation for the pock marks and poorly-fitting accessories that is not related to mold fatigue?


Zob

Sorry, duplicate post. Just ignore this.

Zobovor, you seemed to clip out certain bullet points from my post while neglecting the others that I believe would have answered your questions before you asked them. Suffice it to say, yes there is a long history of blaming mold degradation or "fatigue" for QC issues, especially if a certain mold has been released more than once. But, my point is not that molds don't wear out and become unusable, it's that they don't wear out and become irreplaceable. More molds can be made when the older ones wear out, and maintaining fidelity with the original product is easier than ever. It's a non-issue not because it doesn't exist, but because it doesn't affect the manufacture of toys in the catastrophic way many fans believe it does. This is especially true of anything made in the last decade or so.

As for the original G1 toys, again, I suspect that it's a lot harder to reverse engineer them for some reason or another, maybe because the original molds are quite scare, so finding good "source material" to manufacture new molds may take a lot of resources. For instance, Sunstreaker was never remolded or redecoed at all, so maybe the original molds are so scare, they've been misplaced over time. On the other hand, you have molds that never say die, like G1 Optimus and Soundwave, which have each gone through several revisions, but nonetheless, endure.

Even if reverse engineering a mold takes money, it must still not be that prohibitive of a cost that knock-off/bootlegs can't turn a tidy profit. If it didn't, no one would bother. It's not just that a hole in the market is there to fill, it's that it's easy to fill, that makes it a worthwhile venture for knock-off manufacturers. However, I think you bring up an excellent point about the licensing, safety testing, and whatnot, that can increase costs on the R&D end of things. While reverse engineering a mold may not cost THAT much objectively, it may not turn enough of a profit for Takara/Hasbros bottom line (such things tend to upset the board of investors). Think of how many reissue G1 Sunstreakers would have to be sold to equal the profits from just "High Octane Bumblebee" from the Generations Age of Extinction line. That said, the modern molds that are getting a lot of use, Classics Optimus Prime, Classics Starscream (et al. Seekers), and even Bumblebee are cash cows for Hasbro, so yeah, it's worth it to keep replacing those molds to produce more product. Kids (and collectors) can't get enough of the big characters. So, you can see how eyes can roll when another retool or repaint of a popular mold comes along and people panic that it will flop around like a rag doll and fit together like a Sweedish CD rack, just because they've seen that mold before.

ok that prime looks just like a gundam, swap out the head and its a dead ringer.

Megatron Wolf wrote:ok that prime looks just like a gundam, swap out the head and its a dead ringer.

...is this really the sorry state of Gundam designs these days?

Delta Magnus wrote:

Shadowstream wrote:

Megatron Wolf wrote:ok that prime looks just like a gundam, swap out the head and its a dead ringer.

...is this really the sorry state of Gundam designs these days?

Looks nothing like a Gundam. Looks pretty good to me- I just hope we get a better transforming version of this OP later down the line. I mean, chrome is all well and good, but dat backpack!

If it's the same one pre-orders are already sold out at BBTS

Just found this on Infinite Earth's Twitter. Looks awesome!

https://twitter.com/InfinteEarths/status/472149483434676224/photo/1

Nice! About time we got an actual, existing Dinobot Kreon.
Supposedly it's $25, which isn't too bad. But no alternate mode build?

EDIT:

it's not like they're going out of their way to make kibble, drift falls within acceptable kibble parameters. I really can't see what else they could have done without reengineering the movie version around the figure version. And it's not like Voyager Ironhide where he has most of his cab sides folded up on his forearms. This is pretty efficient kibbleing

william-james88 wrote:

durroth wrote:it's not like they're going out of their way to make kibble, drift falls within acceptable kibble parameters. I really can't see what else they could have done without reengineering the movie version around the figure version. And it's not like Voyager Ironhide where he has most of his cab sides folded up on his forearms. This is pretty efficient kibbleing

Now that I have witnessed RID Prime Vehicon, I dont find much of any kibbleing as efficient as I used to

That's a toy that as the years go by will be seen as a glorious exception and not a rule