Official Images: Takara Tomy Transformers: Age of Extinction Dual Model Kit DMK03 Optimus Prime

Looks great. What's with all the silver though? Is that supposed to be the silver knight Optimus? I'm assuming that idea got dumped at the last minute, because in the film I didn't notice any change in color on him. Unless it's just really subtle.

Delta Magnus wrote:...Dayum. That looks pretty sweet. But seeing that, I think it's safe to say that expecting an accurate transforming version of this design is kinda unfair. I mean, by the looks of things this transformation defies the laws of physics. There's no way they could make an even remotely accurate version without major partsforming. And you all know what I think of partsforming.

And THAT'S why I don't really care for this knight design for Optimus. It's neat and all, but it's impossible for designers to work around that in ways that aren't bulky awkward shell-forming. There's really nothing to indicate that he's a truck outside of the smokestacks, so he's near unidentifiable as a Transformer.

Credit where credit's due, EM Optimus is an engineering marvel. True, his arms might be a little skinny, but his robot mode is condensed, tight and impressively poseable.

Shuttershock wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:...Dayum. That looks pretty sweet. But seeing that, I think it's safe to say that expecting an accurate transforming version of this design is kinda unfair. I mean, by the looks of things this transformation defies the laws of physics. There's no way they could make an even remotely accurate version without major partsforming. And you all know what I think of partsforming.

And THAT'S why I don't really care for this knight design for Optimus. It's neat and all, but it's impossible for designers to work around that in ways that aren't bulky awkward shell-forming. There's really nothing to indicate that he's a truck outside of the smokestacks, so he's near unidentifiable as a Transformer.

Credit where credit's due, EM Optimus is an engineering marvel. True, his arms might be a little skinny, but his robot mode is condensed, tight and impressively poseable.

Indeed. I do tip my hat to the designers for trying to make the design unusual, refreshing and not obviously an upscaled and heavily detailed toy, but it is a pain for those of us who want a decent figure of it. Granted, the increased simplification of the AoE line doesn't help (at least with the very large toys; the Deluxes and some of the Voyagers look same as usual) but really, I doubt even Studio Half-Eye could make an accurate transforming version of that (although I wouldn't put it past them considering they made "perfect transforming" versions of Gunbuster and Gurren Lagann).

On the plus side, this could help push forward the toy engineering/mech designing arts, so to speak. For a similar example, look at Evangelion; the lithe, organic designs were considered too difficult to render in toy form and thus Gainax were bombarded with requests to make them more toyetic. However, Gainax refused to give on the designs, and the series went on to basically rewrite the rules of anime. Plus, they eventually got a toy contract with Sega and several years later there are now lots of good Evangelion figures. So, Eva and its radical designs changed not only the anime industry, but the toy industry too.

Not that the live-action Transformers movies are up to par with Eva of course, but you get what I mean.

Delta Magnus wrote:

Shuttershock wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:...Dayum. That looks pretty sweet. But seeing that, I think it's safe to say that expecting an accurate transforming version of this design is kinda unfair. I mean, by the looks of things this transformation defies the laws of physics. There's no way they could make an even remotely accurate version without major partsforming. And you all know what I think of partsforming.

And THAT'S why I don't really care for this knight design for Optimus. It's neat and all, but it's impossible for designers to work around that in ways that aren't bulky awkward shell-forming. There's really nothing to indicate that he's a truck outside of the smokestacks, so he's near unidentifiable as a Transformer.

Credit where credit's due, EM Optimus is an engineering marvel. True, his arms might be a little skinny, but his robot mode is condensed, tight and impressively poseable.

Indeed. I do tip my hat to the designers for trying to make the design unusual, refreshing and not obviously an upscaled and heavily detailed toy, but it is a pain for those of us who want a decent figure of it. Granted, the increased simplification of the AoE line doesn't help (at least with the very large toys; the Deluxes and some of the Voyagers look same as usual) but really, I doubt even Studio Half-Eye could make an accurate transforming version of that (although I wouldn't put it past them considering they made "perfect transforming" versions of Gunbuster and Gurren Lagann).

On the plus side, this could help push forward the toy engineering/mech designing arts, so to speak. For a similar example, look at Evangelion; the lithe, organic designs were considered too difficult to render in toy form and thus Gainax were bombarded with requests to make them more toyetic. However, Gainax refused to give on the designs, and the series went on to basically rewrite the rules of anime. Plus, they eventually got a toy contract with Sega and several years later there are now lots of good Evangelion figures. So, Eva and its radical designs changed not only the anime industry, but the toy industry too.

Not that the live-action Transformers movies are up to par with Eva of course, but you get what I mean.

I see your point. However, the main difference here is that the Eva (to my knowledge) do not transform, and have the luxury of having more lithe forms with ball joints.

Now, I'm not saying that they have to transform to be Transformers toys. I'm aware of Action Masters, Pretenders, Revoltech, Robot Heroes and those God awful plastic bricks they make now a days. I'm just saying that Optimus Prime's knight-mode model was never meant to logically become a truck, just a sleek robot. While this is perfectly serviceable with these Dual Models, it has made every other toy that has had to transform be a cluttered, back-heavy kibbled mess that is about as far removed from the screen design as possible. If a screen-accurate transformable toy did exist, such a thing would be Metroplex-scaled, break apart into dozens if not hundreds of panels and hinges, and would be a price point that not even Fansproject would be willing to commit to.

This might be the wrong place to talk about engineering aesthetics, but it's been a pet peeve about this "knight" design for me for a long while now.

I find it weird that the $10 One Step Changer and $12 Power Battler versions of Optimus both have more cohesive robot modes and less kibble than the $40-50 Leader Class figure.

Shuttershock wrote:

Evil_the_Nub wrote:

Shuttershock wrote:Credit where credit's due, EM Optimus is an engineering marvel. True, his arms might be a little skinny, but his robot mode is condensed, tight and impressively poseable.

What's really impressive is it's so simple, he basically turns inside-out. Hound even transforms in a similar way. I don't know why they didn't take that approach with leader Optimus and Galvatron.

That's what annoys me even more about Galvatron's design. In the film (spoilers), he "transforms" by basically dematerializing into cubes and reforming as a robot, meaning that absolutely NO care has to be put into parts from vehicle mode fitting in. Because of this, they've just had to make him a shell-former with a semi-backpack.

In short, the movie designs and sensibilities are hindering the engineering of the toys.

A lot of that has to do with the fact that Hasbro is basically made to sit in a corner while Paramount handles most of the movie stuff. I really think Hasbro needs to step up and insist that the movie designers work alongside the toy designers.

What I don't understand is this: How is coordinating thousands of tiny cubes to coalesce into a humanoid form "cheaper" than what we've seen for the past 3 movies?

As a side note: You don't see Skids and Mudflap transform behind a curtain because it "looks cool". You don't see Drift transform behind a building because it "looks cool". You don't see a bunch of Transformers transform because the camera is zoomed all the way in on the knee or the shoulder during conversion. It can't look cool because you can't even see it.
These are cost saving measures.

EDIT:

chuckdawg1999 wrote:A lot of that has to do with the fact that Hasbro is basically made to sit in a corner while Paramount handles most of the movie stuff. I really think Hasbro needs to step up and insist that the movie designers work alongside the toy designers.

I'm a little surprised I'm only just now learning that Hasbro takes a back seat when it comes to the movies. In every other iteration I know of the fiction is based on the product with the exception of the non toy based characters.

The reasoning for the "cubified transformations" was to show that KSI really didn't fully understand the transformers technology.

1PrimeProductions wrote:The reasoning for the "cubified transformations" was to show that KSI really didn't fully understand the transformers technology.

According to what source?