PDA

View Full Version : [Dorling Kindersley] The Ultimate Guide


secretcode
2007-11-25, 07:43 PM
Hello. I was wondering something about the ultimate guide. Is it worth the purchase? I usually dig DK's books, especially the Star Wars one.

Is there any place with scans of it, in order for me to see a sample of what's inside?

Denyer
2007-11-25, 07:53 PM
Ben included a couple of pages with his review:

http://www.bwtf.com/br/dkultimate.shtml

Wouldn't bother, personally -- a lot of it is grounded in Dreamwave continuity, and the new edition didn't allow for editing; it just contains a few extra pages of info leading into current stuff.

Then again, if you like the DK approach it might be your cup of tea. I wasn't too impressed by the comprehensiveness of the Batman one I read; reading around the subject on Wikipedia would probably be more in-depth.

(It's been published with various ISBN numbers, so look around on Amazon for secondhand copies.)

If you do get one, d'you feel like reviewing it?

inflatable dalek
2007-11-25, 08:00 PM
As a coffee table picture book it's fine. I've no great urge to get the new edition myself though.

Halfshell
2007-11-25, 08:44 PM
It's not worth the effort.

secretcode
2007-11-25, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Denyer
If you do get one, d'you feel like reviewing it?

Sure, Why not.

secretcode
2007-12-02, 01:11 AM
I picked it up today, I'll get around to reviewing soon, after things in real life are over with.

Tramp
2008-02-07, 04:57 AM
I've read it, and I loved it. I found it to be very informative.

Halfshell
2008-02-08, 09:53 AM
I found it to be cobbled together, vague, uninformative, full of stuff that was blatantly made up on the spot and too focussed on a brand new continuity that crashed and burned about a fortnight later.

Chris McFeely
2008-02-08, 11:31 AM
I second Halfshell's comment. I normally *love* DK's "Ultimate Guide" books - the ones for characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, the Avengers or Ghost Rider are great books that cover their entire history in print in a concise, informative manner. Where the TF book falls down is that this is NOT what it is - it's not a guide to "what has been," but a guide to "what is," more focused in attempting to create a new "definitive" Transformers continuity (the Dreamwave one, because it was current at the time) than in chroniciling the HISTORY of the franchise, which is what I wanted out of the book.

Now, that's not to say that the historical aspects go ignored - there ARE pages that cover the original cartoon and comics. But outside of those spreads, the entire G1 section is based around the Dreamwave universe, and this fails because the DW universe was so incredibly *underdeveloped* when the book was written. Consquently, most of the information in the book had to be MADE UP *FOR* THE BOOK, which to me is the *complete* antithesis of what an Ultimate Guide should be about.

This all applies only to the G1 section of the book, though. The BW, BM and Armada sections are quite well done. RiD is a ****ing joke, though, focusing only on toys and illustrated with a lot of bad images. And the incomplete nature of the tv show pages annoys me, as they pick and choose "select episodes" to talk about. Why not do them in the same maner as the comic pages, where, rather than do an issue-by-issue list, they just talk about the major events that happened?

Finally, what remains exceptionally tiresome is that everyone seems to think that Simon Furman is qualified to write every Transformers book ever. Because he's not. If someone who just *knew more* about what they were writing about, this book would be a lot better.

Despite ALL of that, though, if I ever see someone who has been out of Transformers since before Beast Wars wanting to get back into the franchise, I always reccommend this book. Although it's *specifics* are ****ed, it's a decent overview of what has been happening with Transformers since G1 that'll put you on the right track to getting back into the franchise. It's just really not much use for fans at all, because it's so low on actual, real historical information that it won't tell you a single damn thing you don't already know.

Halfshell
2008-02-08, 11:41 AM
Yeah, being the author of one aspect doesn't automatically qualify somebody as an authority on all of it.

What it needed was somebody who had a good grounding in most areas, with assists in each aspect from an expert in that field.

Consquently, most of the information in the book had to be MADE UP *FOR* THE BOOK

I think the best example of this is Cybertron's robot mode. Okay, you can point to Cybertron Primus as being modelled after the image and yadda yadda yadda, but it doesn't change the fact that it was the first time in any kind of official anything where Cybertron had been depicted as having a transformation. It was a common fanwank idea, but one that could always be shot down as "Unicron spent his energy fashioning a robot mode, Primus spent his energy creating the Transformers to fight on his behalf".

Suddenly an artist's impression of what it might look like is being presented to fans as what it actually is... then it winds up in official fiction later. That's not documenting info. That's pulling it out of your arse and letting future events cover you.

Damolisher
2008-02-23, 05:56 AM
Oh, but guys, it's not factually inaccurate. Everything is a retcon, everything they write is true, especially about Primus! (/Sarcasm)

In all honesty, I third Halfshell's opinion. The book is crap.

Sir Auros
2008-02-23, 04:02 PM
I don't think it's fully crap. I mean, it's an interesting read, but not everything in there is going to be accurate. It was DWcentric and like Brend said, they folded pretty soon after it was made. That said, if you're the type to spend time splitting hairs online about continuity...you need to spend less time online.

another tf fan
2008-02-29, 09:08 PM
I like the book well enough. Good reading on the John.

That said, as an " Ultimate Guide" it is not.

The way they covered Alternators and Classics but skipped over Cybertron really bugged me.

Heinrad
2008-03-30, 06:45 AM
Eh, it's not bad. I liked the toy info, and I love the Powermaster Prime pic.

And the editing foul-ups are amusing.

My question is, why make the G1 characterization changes? Listing Ironhide as a construction engineer made no sense(in Armada/Energon/Cybertron, sure, but G1?), and grounding Bludgeon as an adherent to the dark forces at work in the Transformers universe......

Have they changed anything aside from adding new pages for the IDW stuff in newer printings?

Tramp
2008-03-30, 07:02 AM
Eh, it's not bad. I liked the toy info, and I love the Powermaster Prime pic.

And the editing foul-ups are amusing.

My question is, why make the G1 characterization changes? Listing Ironhide as a construction engineer made no sense(in Armada/Energon/Cybertron, sure, but G1?), and grounding Bludgeon as an adherent to the dark forces at work in the Transformers universe......

Have they changed anything aside from adding new pages for the IDW stuff in newer printings?

Bludgeon being an adherant of dark forces came from War Within: Dark Ages. In issue #1, Bludgeon, Mindwipe and Bugly are engaged in an arcane ritual when the Fallen enters their abode and recruits them as his acolytes.

inflatable dalek
2008-03-30, 07:29 PM
Which is part of the reason the book is ultimately worthless as a character guide, things like the entry on Bludgeon only apply to one now defunct continuity rather that in this case only featured for a few issues.

I do agree that the bias towards Furman written comics is a little unfortunate, and probably misses the target audience a fair bit as well (the average nostalgia buyer is going to be more interested in the cartoon than Alignment and so on).

Tramp
2008-03-31, 12:46 AM
Which is part of the reason the book is ultimately worthless as a character guide, things like the entry on Bludgeon only apply to one now defunct continuity rather that in this case only featured for a few issues.

I do agree that the bias towards Furman written comics is a little unfortunate, and probably misses the target audience a fair bit as well (the average nostalgia buyer is going to be more interested in the cartoon than Alignment and so on).

Whether or not the DW continuity is "defunct" or not is moot. The book was written while the DW continuity was in effect and the information DW itself used was taken from previous canon, in Bludgeon's case, from his tech spec and from Marvel, where he was more mystic. It has always been part of who Bludgeon is. http://www.unicron.us/tf1989/techspec/bludgeon.jpg http://www.unicron.us/tf1989/toypix/bludgeon.htm I was reading the Spotlight vol 2 TPB which included Spotlight: Soundwave, which had Bludgeon in it, and even there he was a mystic involved in arcane arts and such. It is something long established as part of his character. It was Simon Furman who instilled that into his character early on in Marvel, Furman who instilled it into his character in War Within: Dark Ages, and instilled it in Spotlight: Soundwave and in Stormbringer. Bludgeon is the classic mystic martial artist. A practitioner and believer in mystic arts and arcane codes and knowledge. He always has been. That wasn't just DW.

zigzagger
2008-03-31, 01:07 AM
Hmm. I don't know.... I wouldn't call Bludgeon a practitioner of dark arts, etc, in the IDW-verse (both in Stormbringer and Spotlight: Soundwave). Perhaps a martial artist, that does some to be a given with him. IDW's portrayal of him, though admittedly, seemed to take some cues from previous incarnations as a fanatic (at least in DW). IDW's Bludgeon has been more like a mad cult leader who, among other things, had believed that sending a non-sentient Thunderwing on a second rampage would purify and restore Cybertron to its formal glory. I don't recall him dabbling in dark arts in order to execute this vision. He's just a nut.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 01:19 AM
Hmm. I don't know.... I wouldn't call Bludgeon a practitioner of dark arts, etc, in the IDW-verse (both in Stormbringer and Spotlight: Soundwave). Perhaps a martial artist, that does some to be a given with him. IDW's portrayal of him, though admittedly, seemed to take some cues from previous incarnations as a fanatic (at least in DW). IDW's Bludgeon has been more like a mad cult leader who, among other things, had believed that sending a non-sentient Thunderwing on a second rampage would purify and restore Cybertron to its formal glory. I don't recall him dabbling in dark arts in order to execute this vision. He's just a nut.

A cultist. By that very word, that implies arcane arts and the occult—dark arts and mysticism. not necessarily "hocus-pocus", but definatley occult knowledge and mystic beliefs. Metillikato is itself a mystic art, combining elements of both Circuit-Su and Chrystalocution with a strong dose of spirituality thrown in. That in and of itself makes him a practitioner of mystic arts.

zigzagger
2008-03-31, 01:22 AM
Could you not boldface. Thanks.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 01:29 AM
Could you not boldface. Thanks.

No, I won't stop using bold face. It is being used for it's intended purpose and being used properly. That being emphasis. It isn't against nettiquet. It isn't trolling, it isn't yelling. It is perfectly legal, perfectly acceptible for a grammarical standpoint. There is nothing wrong with it.

zigzagger
2008-03-31, 01:39 AM
No, I won't stop using bold face. It is being used for it's intended purpose and being used properly. That being emphasis. It isn't against nettiquet. It isn't trolling, it isn't yelling. It is perfectly legal, perfectly acceptible for a grammarical standpoint. There is nothing wrong with it.

Don't be coy. You know exactly why I asked you to. You abuse it on a regular basis, it has been perceived as abrasive and condescending (similar to the tone you are addressing me now), and you have been temporarily banned because of it. I, like many other posters, am perfectly capable of picking out key points in arguments, and don't need them to be pointed out like I am an invalid. As Denyer has already told you, we're not in a comic book.
Keep it up, and I am locking this thread.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 01:44 AM
Slight difference between a spiritual/martial outlook and the Macbeth-lite Furman went for in Dark Ages, and again a leap to the disconnect between cause and effect in Stormbringer. He's sane in Marvel stuff, striving for individual perfection rather than making deals with or trying to use other forces for power.

Also managed to accomplish more than many other Decepticon leaders, with the warworld. Megatron got rather a raw deal in the old material...

Heinrad
2008-03-31, 01:56 AM
I figured Bludgeon sent Thunderwing on his little excursion more as a test for the new energon.

And Tramp, Tramp, Tramp...... You really got to work on your research.

The unicron.us page you provide as your link, right there below the scanned tech spec, has a major flaw. That's not a G1 universe entry. Bludgeon never got one. It is, however, the DW More Than Meets The Eye entry for him. And as the argument is whether or not Bludgeon in G1/G2 was an adherent to the dark arts, it is, therefore, irrelevant.

His tech spec simply states that he's a master of a deadly martial art, Metallikato. The fact that it's made of of elements of Crystalocution and Circuit-Su with who knows what else added in is, once again, out of DW. For G1/G2 purposes, it's simply another martial art. Presumably more arcane, but still a martial art. In human terms, look at the different schools of martial arts. Some are more popular than others, so there are more practicioners.

http://repowers.tripod.com/bludgeon/index.html

The Bludgeon Home Page. The universe entry here is one made up by the page's creator based on what he read in G1/G2. The closest we get to "dark arts" is that Bludgeon meditates, studies ancient texts, and follows the teaching of the Ultimate Warrior(who, we learn in issue 80, was a warped understanding of The Last Autobot. Not that he said much......). Saying that in G1/G2 Bludgeon was a user of "dark arts" because of this is like saying that because you, say, read The Book of 5 Rings or The Art of War means you also worship the devil. He's a samurai, if he's anything at all.

Does this mean Bludgeon would be above using psychology? Of course not. Look at his shell, for pity's sake. It's supposed to be scary.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 02:20 AM
I figured Bludgeon sent Thunderwing on his little excursion more as a test for the new energon.

And Tramp, Tramp, Tramp...... You really got to work on your research.

The unicron.us page you provide as your link, right there below the scanned tech spec, has a major flaw. That's not a G1 universe entry. Bludgeon never got one. It is, however, the DW More Than Meets The Eye entry for him. And as the argument is whether or not Bludgeon in G1/G2 was an adherent to the dark arts, it is, therefore, irrelevant.

His tech spec simply states that he's a master of a deadly martial art, Metallikato. The fact that it's made of of elements of Crystalocution and Circuit-Su with who knows what else added in is, once again, out of DW. For G1/G2 purposes, it's simply another martial art. Presumably more arcane, but still a martial art. In human terms, look at the different schools of martial arts. Some are more popular than others, so there are more practicioners.

http://repowers.tripod.com/bludgeon/index.html

The Bludgeon Home Page. The universe entry here is one made up by the page's creator based on what he read in G1/G2. The closest we get to "dark arts" is that Bludgeon meditates, studies ancient texts, and follows the teaching of the Ultimate Warrior(who, we learn in issue 80, was a warped understanding of The Last Autobot. Not that he said much......). Saying that in G1/G2 Bludgeon was a user of "dark arts" because of this is like saying that because you, say, read The Book of 5 Rings or The Art of War means you also worship the devil. He's a samurai, if he's anything at all.

Does this mean Bludgeon would be above using psychology? Of course not. Look at his shell, for pity's sake. It's supposed to be scary.

The Unicron.com entry is not a Marvel universe entry. It is a G1 entry. The DW comics were definately Generation One. The very title of their comics said Generation One. As you, yourself admit, the Universe entry you linked to was a fan-created one (regardless of whether he based it upon what he read from the comics, it is still his interpretation of that information), not an official one. The one posted on Unicron.com is an officially published one. and it is official canon information from DW, Marvel, the cartoon, etc, that Simon Furman used when writing that book, much of which he himself had previously written, and if any writer knows Bludgeon, it's Simon Furman.

Also, even our own Martial arts, some definately have a much more mystic aspect to them, particularly Kung Fu, Tai-Chi, Ninjitstu, Kenjitsu, among others. This includes the arts of the Samurai. They were very spritual and steeped in mysticism and ritual. Their beliefs about fighting and the way of the sword were heavily steeped in mystic belief and spirituality, particularly Zen. Metillikato is the same. I have also read and own all of the US G1 Marvel comics, and he definaltey practiced mystic arts. Metillikato is a mystic art. It is an arcane art with a lot of mysticism, spirituality, ritualism. Whether it becomes a "dark" art or "light" art is based upon the alignment of the practitioner and his application of his craft.

Also, there is a difference betwqeen simply reading a story or some texts, and studying them for the purpose of gaining arcane knowledge and to advance your craft. Bludgeon was doing the latter. He studied these text in order to put that knowledge into practice. He wasn't reading a story.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 02:42 AM
information from DW, Marvel, the cartoon, etc
It's the text of the DW bio badly typed, next to some images of older material...

http://img230.imagevenue.com/loc61/th_27326_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_31_122_61lo.jpg (http://img230.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=27326_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_31_122_61lo.jpg) http://img25.imagevenue.com/loc703/th_27337_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_32_122_703lo.jpg (http://img25.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=27337_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_32_122_703lo.jpg)

Bludgeon never made it into any cartoons, or got a Marvel profile.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 02:49 AM
It's the text of the DW bio badly typed, next to some images of older material...

http://img230.imagevenue.com/loc61/th_27326_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_31_122_61lo.jpg (http://img230.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=27326_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_31_122_61lo.jpg) http://img25.imagevenue.com/loc703/th_27337_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_32_122_703lo.jpg (http://img25.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=27337_Transformers_-_More_Than_Meets_the_Eye_01_-_32_122_703lo.jpg)

Bludgeon never made it into any cartoons, or got a Marvel profile.

No, he didn't, but it was Simon Furman who wrote all of the stories he appeared in within the Marvel comics, and it is Simon Furman's depiction of him in War Within, as well as his previous depictions, which became the basis for his MtMtE bio, and later, his Ultimate Guide bio.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 03:02 AM
it was Simon Furman who wrote all of the stories he appeared in within the Marvel comics, and it is Simon Furman's depiction of him in War Within, as well as his previous depictions, which became the basis for his MtMtE bio, and later, his Ultimate Guide bio.
It doesn't make them the same character, any more than IDW Prime is Marvel US Prime or DW Prime. Furman's written all of those too, and laid down different characterisation for each.

Furman's a bit formulaic at times, but even he doesn't cookie-cutter his own work much.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 03:11 AM
It doesn't make them the same character, any more than IDW Prime is Marvel US Prime or DW Prime. Furman's written all of those too, and laid down different characterisation for each.

I never said it was. But then again, that was not what was asked in the first place. The question was asked what the basis for his UT bio was, and that was a combination of his previous depictions within G1 continuity, including DW and Marvel. Also, Prime's Characterisation has been pretty consistant throughout the ages and different incarnations. HE really isn't all that different. G1 Bludgeon is G1 Bludgeon, no matter which comic publisher's continuity he is in, at least he's supposed to be, and his characterization should be pretty consistant, IMO. It's not the same thing as G1 Bludgoen and RID Bludgeon. Those are definately different characters. IDW of course isn't classic G1. IT's a complete reimagining, which means there will be differences in his characterization compared to his previous incarnations. His Ultimate Guide bio is that of his Generation One incarnation. Yes, it was written based primarily on his DW appearance, but it also drew from his Marvel and toy information as well, which is what DW itself did in the first place.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 04:10 AM
]Prime's Characterisation has been pretty consistant throughout the ages and different incarnations. HE really isn't all that different.
"I'm a soldier. I fight. That's what I do."

That's neither of the Marvel Optimuses, nor the cartoon Prime/Convoy...

G1 Bludgeon is G1 Bludgeon, no matter which comic publisher's continuity he is in, at least he's supposed to be
In the Mayhem Attack Squad portrayal, he's honourable and seeks a warrior's death. In the US comic, he backstabs the Autobots. Furman had already shifted between characterisations before Dreamwave. In neither is there the suggestion that Bludgeon would summon dark forces in order to be rewarded by them, as is the setup from Dark Ages. He's self-made.

To pick another example, Prowl is given a character arc in the UK stories towards being less paralysed by logic and generally less of a dick (running from strips such as Crisis of Command through to the b&w material.) That's ignored by the Marvel US storyline, as Furman didn't have the opportunity for similar development.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 05:10 AM
"I'm a soldier. I fight. That's what I do."

That's neither of the Marvel Optimuses, nor the cartoon Prime/Convoy... It's not DW Optimus either.
Also, take into account the context of that statement. Optimus Prime is a soldier, and a statesman, and a scholar.

In the Mayhem Attack Squad portrayal, he's honourable and seeks a warrior's death. In the US comic, he backstabs the Autobots. Furman had already shifted between characterisations before Dreamwave. In neither is there the suggestion that Bludgeon would summon dark forces in order to be rewarded by them, as is the setup from Dark Ages. He's self-made. He still has a code of ethics even in US Marvel. Even Samurai only extended their honor to those they believed deserved honor. To those considered beneath them, They were not as "ethical".

To pick another example, Prowl is given a character arc in the UK stories towards being less paralysed by logic and generally less of a dick (running from strips such as Crisis of Command through to the b&w material.) That's ignored by the Marvel US storyline, as Furman didn't have the opportunity for similar development.
Prowl's being "logical to a fault" was part of his toy bio as well, not simply something from the US comics. It is a part of his character concept.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 05:40 AM
Prowl's being "logical to a fault" was part of his toy bio as well
*whoosh*

Furman's characters have in various cases followed different character arcs in fiction he was writing at the same time, let alone fiction separated by years.

It's not DW Optimus either.
Sadly, it's about as definitive as V1 got -- that and Prime talking in army colloquialisms such as "welcome back, boys". Then we had a remixed Hot Rod style origin in War Within, chosen and upgraded rather than gaining the leadership slot through ability, at odds with Furman's own "And There Shall Come A Leader".

Samurai only extended their honor to those they believed deserved honor. To those considered beneath them, They were not as "ethical".
I'm moderately sure this didn't extend as far as sabotaging lifeboats or poisoning wells; they simply didn't extend their hand of protection to those they deemed unworthy, and carved out for themselves the right to kill disrespectful commoners. Earlier, in the mid-to-late 16th century, there'd been a great deal of social mobility -- becoming a samurai was an opportunity to advance oneself, rather than a bloodline.

Pick up the "Way of the Warrior" collection if you want to follow Bludgeon's characterisation under Furman; that version of the character wouldn't abandon opponents such as Grimlock to a non-warrior's death.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 06:02 AM
*whoosh*

Furman's characters have in various cases followed different character arcs in fiction he was writing at the same time, let alone fiction separated by years.


Sadly, it's about as definitive as V1 got -- that and Prime talking in army colloquialisms such as "welcome back, boys". Then we had a remixed Hot Rod style origin in War Within, chosen and upgraded rather than gaining the leadership slot through ability, at odds with Furman's own "And There Shall Come A Leader". I won't argue about Volume 1, but I can say that his characterisation in Volume 2 through the entire ongoing series, as well as War Within is iconic Optimus Prime.


I'm moderately sure this didn't extend as far as sabotaging lifeboats or poisoning wells; they simply didn't extend their hand of protection to those they deemed unworthy, and carved out for themselves the right to kill disrespectful commoners. Earlier, in the mid-to-late 16th century, there'd been a great deal of social mobility -- becoming a samurai was an opportunity to advance oneself, rather than a bloodline.I wouldn't have put it past them. From what I understand the "Code of Bushido" as we know it now, was not really developed until much later.

Pick up the "Way of the Warrior" collection if you want to follow Bludgeon's characterisation under Furman; that version of the character wouldn't abandon opponents such as Grimlock to a non-warrior's death. Maybe, maybe not. It still does not discount his mystic background.

Warcry
2008-03-31, 06:32 AM
Pick up the "Way of the Warrior" collection if you want to follow Bludgeon's characterisation under Furman; that version of the character wouldn't abandon opponents such as Grimlock to a non-warrior's death.
By the same token, though, it's quite possible that he'd consider anyone who would allow a trap like that to kill them undeserving of an honourable death. At any rate, Bludgeon didn't seem particularly surprised or disappointed when he found out that the Autobots had survived his betrayal.

Some of Bludgeon's lines in US#80 do suggest a mystical bent beyond what we'd seen of him previously. He mentions that he felt Optimus Prime's 'aura' leave his body when he died, which suggests he possesses arcane powers above and beyond the telekinesis we saw in the UK comics (which could, in and of itself, be technologically generated). He also talks about Metallikato in very religious terms: it's the "one true path" and Prime is a blasphemer for questioning its tenets. What any of that means is anyone's guess -- and it's certainly quite a bit different from either his Dreamwave or IDW portrayals regardless of how you interpret it -- but it definitely establishes him as something more than just a spiritually-inclined samurai.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 07:16 AM
Don't know how relevant it is to anything, but what annoyed me is how Carnivac is protrayed in Dreamwave's MTMTE bios, when you consider his original self in the Marvel UK comics was all about honor and respect, etc, whereas in the MTMTE profiles, he was described as a snarling lunatic.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 07:33 AM
Don't know how relevant it is to anything, but what annoyed me is how Carnivac is protrayed in Dreamwave's MTMTE bios, when you consider his original self in the Marvel UK comics was all about honor and respect, etc, whereas in the MTMTE profiles, he was described as a snarling lunatic.

Yes, but that too is explained in his bio. and it comes from his toy techspec bio: A growling, howling, mad dog destroyer. Commits abominable acts with unrelenting glee. Always smiling, even in battle. Outer shell has built-in hydrolic lifters that enable him to jump over 50 feet in any direction. High-intensity laser beams in eyes incinerate targets in seconds. In robot Mode, armed with anti-thermal cannon with infrared scope that freezes targets on impact. http://tfu.info/1988/Decepticon/Carnivac/carnivac.htm MTMTE attributes his change from noble warrior to crazed Decepticon as likely being the result of damage to his neuro-circuitry long ago. Thus, the "mad dog" persona is accurate to the original character concept from Hasbro yet still harkens back to his "noble" history established in Marvel UK. There is a reason for the change.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 07:47 AM
Yeah, but I'm just pointing out that that went over about as well as a lead balloon, didn't it? The whole "Carnivac's bio describes him as what he isn't." from MTMTE. A lot of people on Seibertron weren't amused. My point is: It's stupid to change things when change is unnecessary. That's like writing "Baywatch: The ultimate Guide" and all of a sudden the entry on Mitch Buchanon is changed to describe Notch Johnson.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 07:53 AM
That's just it, they didn't change him to what he isn't. Carnivac the Decepticon is a crazed lunatic as established by his original toy concept from Hasbro. It was Marvel UK that deviated from that original character. Dreamwave simply went back to the source, which was the original toy bio. At the same time, they gave homage to his Marvel UK incarnation by stating that he was once a noble warrior and partner to Catilla.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 07:59 AM
Um, hi, yeah, um, I'm not thick. You've been told not to bold, so knock it off. Apparently, however, you don't get the point in what the UnUltimate was meant to be: It was supposed to be a chronicle of facts from every series, etc. It was not. A majority of the material was written FOR the book specifically, taking Dreamwave as it's base. You've been told this many, many times, and yet you still don't seem to understand it for some reason.

What I'm meaning (Obviously, I have to dumb it down for some people) is that unnecessary change from what people are used to does not bode well. The Ultimate Guide is not popular from what I've seen, because it makes up a lot of stuff, and MTMTE is not seen as a good reference either because of it's changes to well-known characters also, and not just changes, DRASTIC changes.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 08:10 AM
The information about characters like Carnivac came from Hasbro's toys. That is where Dreamwave got it as well. Hasbro established Carnivac as a crazed lutatic in his toy bio on the back of the package in his tech spec. It was Marvel that changed it, not Dreamwave. Dreamwave simply went back to the original source— the Carnivac toy. They did the same thing with the Dinobots and every other character. It wasn't simply made up for the Ultimate Guide or for Dreamwave. It all came from Hasbro, from the original toy concepts. Grimlockj being intelligent but belligerent is part of his toy tech specs. He is not an idiot as protrayed in the cartoon. He simply has a speech impediment. The Dinobots were not meant to be created on Earth. Snarl's toy techspec bio says they originated from Cybertron and had Cybertronian forms. Specifically, it states that he hates the form that the Ark gave him and "longs to return to Cybertron." That is what Dreamwave used. That is what the Ultimate Guide used. They went back to the original source, which was the toys themselves. Not the cartoon, not the Marvel comics— the toys. Therefore, it was not an "unnecessary change". Dreamwave, and Simon Furman went back to the source and followed that above all else, not the derivitive material. And the source is the toys.

inflatable dalek
2008-03-31, 08:29 AM
No, I won't stop using bold face. It is being used for it's intended purpose and being used properly. That being emphasis. It isn't against nettiquet. It isn't trolling, it isn't yelling. It is perfectly legal, perfectly acceptible for a grammarical standpoint. There is nothing wrong with it.

Why yes, it is perfectly legal. It would also be perfectly legal for me to replace the content of every single post of yours in this thread with a huge picture of Lalla Ward. I know there's at least one other person here who'd appreciate that, but I imagine you'd find it irritating, condescending, rude and utterly pointless. Which is how everyone else is viewing the bold thing.

I won't argue about Volume 1, but I can say that his characterisation in Volume 2 through the entire ongoing series, as well as War Within is iconic Optimus Prime.

That's something that doesn't seem to be agreed with by a lot of people, Prime treating Ultra Magnus like the ex who dumped him in War and Peace got a lot of ridicule at the time. And the portrayal of young Prime as a confused and conflicted scholar was derried as not being true to the character by a lot of people as well (mainly those only familiar with the more gung ho cartoon version as opposed to the slightly more introspective Marvel take).

Tramp
2008-03-31, 08:50 AM
Why yes, it is perfectly legal. It would also be perfectly legal for me to replace the content of every single post of yours in this thread with a huge picture of Lalla Ward. I know there's at least one other person here who'd appreciate that, but I imagine you'd find it irritating, condescending, rude and utterly pointless. Which is how everyone else is viewing the bold thing. Regardles, it is not being rude, condescending or pointless. Rule number one about communication is that it is up to the person doing the communicating to make sure what he is saying is understood the way he intends. He is the one responsible for making sure his point is clear. Thus, bolding the key point I need emphasized makes sure that no one can misunderstand or misinterpret. That isn't being condescending. It is not taking anything for granted. Therfore, it is not being rude, it is not being condescending. It is using the feature for esxactly what it is intended. Emphasizing key point I, the communicator specifically want grasped and understood as important without any room for misinterpretation. That is what it is for and that is what I will continue to use it for.



That's something that doesn't seem to be agreed with by a lot of people, Prime treating Ultra Magnus like the ex who dumped him in War and Peace got a lot of ridicule at the time. And the portrayal of young Prime as a confused and conflicted scholar was derried as not being true to the character by a lot of people as well (mainly those only familiar with the more gung ho cartoon version as opposed to the slightly more introspective Marvel take).
Whether or not it is agreed to by many people is moot. As for Prime's characterization in War and Peace and in War Within, honestly, I would have been disappointed if he hadn't been portrayed the way he was. Prime felt betrayed by Magnus, Of course he should be bitter and treat Magnus that way. IT is perfectly normal. And no one stsarts out as a "perfect leader" right from the start. Obviously Prime had to grow into that role. War Within was his baptism of fire. It was his origin story. Do you think General Patton started out asd a great military leader? How about George Washington? How about Alexander the Great? None of these great leaders started out as such. They had to grow into those roles. The same with Optimus Prime. He needed to grow into the role of Leader. Even in War Dawn, with the "Orion Pax" origin, he didn't start out as a "gung-ho" great leader. He started out as a "nobody". Even after becoming Prime, we only see him in that one fight with Megatron not him as a leader just starting out. We see him as a vengful warrior seeking immediate retribution for his fallen friends. We never see the interval between that and when the Autobots first leave for Earth. We never see his development as Autobot Leader. Do you honestly believe he was a confident leader right from the get-go? I certainly wouldn't beleive that. His development in War Within was perfectly executed and natural. Leadership needs to be learned through experience. It doesn't just spring up out of nothing. That is what War Within established. That is also what we are seeing currently in Transformers: Animated—a young leader just starting out. Prime had to learn to be the confident leader he became. It is totally unbelievable that he was always such. No one stats out as a great leader. They have to learn to be such and grow into it. That is what War Within shows us.

inflatable dalek
2008-03-31, 09:10 AM
Regardles, it is not being rude, condescending or pointless. Rule number one about communication is that it is up to the person doing the communicating to make sure what he is saying is understood the way he intends. He is the one responsible for making sure his point is clear. Thus, bolding the key point I need emphasized makes sure that no one can misunderstand or misinterpret.

Yet according to you we are constantly missing your point, taking you out of context and just not getting the one true facts. If the bold is supposed to achieve clarity it would seem to be failing.

That is what it is for and that is what I will continue to use it for.

You've just managed two straight posts without it, and trust me your points and views are just as clear as the ones with.

Do you think General Patton started out asd a great military leader? How about George Washington? How about Alexander the Great? None of these great leaders started out as such.

By the time they became the leaders of their respective armies (which is when we first meet Prime) they were, and Alexander the Great at least was pretty much one from the get go. He didn't live long enough to have much time for youthful inexperience).

Denyer
2008-03-31, 04:16 PM
Rule number one about communication is that it is up to the person doing the communicating to make sure what he is saying is understood the way he intends.

Having been told that the way you're being understood is that people think you're being abrasive, condescending, etc. you keep doing it anyway. Making yourself further understood as intending to give that impression, since you're fully aware of how it's being received.

Also, if it was a convention other people would do it. Lots. And... they don't.

If you want to make your posts clearer, organise using more paragraphs rather than creating large run-on blocks of text. More people might read them.

Will be back to the character stuff once I've been and handled stuff for other people with software...

Tramp
2008-03-31, 07:31 PM
<snip>
By the time they became the leaders of their respective armies (which is when we first meet Prime) they were, and Alexander the Great at least was pretty much one from the get go. He didn't live long enough to have much time for youthful inexperience).

No leader is one from the "get-go". They need to learn. Even Patton had to grow from being a lowly Second Lieutenant through Firstl Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Lt. Colonel, Colonel, Brig Gen, etc. into a General. Prime was thrust into command without that benefit. He didn't slowly rise from the ranks, gaining experience before being put in command. He went from being a nobody with no command experience, with no combat experience, into command of the Autobot forces with no preparation and no training. That means he didn't have the experience yet and had to grow into that role into which he had been thrust. That takes time.

Another example: Have you been watching the new Battlestar Galactica?. Look at President Roslyn. She was a lowly education department employee, a minor political position before the Cylons attacked and killed the entire Presidential heirarchy. She was suddenly thrust into position of President and had to learn the ropes along the way.

The same is true with Prime. He had to learn the ropes the hard way after being put into power. He didn't have the benefit of experience. This too seems to be a pattern among Cybertronians. The chosen Matrix bearer always seems to be someone who is new and untested. The Matrix seems to specifically attune itself to an Autobot who is relatively "innocent" in the ways of war and leadership. That is what Optimus Prime had to deal with. That is what War Within showed us. And personally, I'm glad they did. It made for a great story.

inflatable dalek
2008-03-31, 07:55 PM
No leader is one from the "get-go". They need to learn.

I never said they don't (though Alexander the Great was pretty much an exception to that rule), just that by the time they did become generals/commanders/leaders ect they were.

He didn't slowly rise from the ranks, gaining experience before being put in command. He went from being a nobody with no command experience, with no combat experience, into command of the Autobot forces with no preparation and no training. That means he didn't have the experience yet and had to grow into that role into which he had been thrust. That takes time.

Part of the problem with War Within is that we don't really see Prime settle into the leadership position, he pisses of his troops, falls into a big hole with Megatron (where he somehow does a Jedi mind trick on him) and sees some crap waste of page Easter eggs that someone totally change his outlook on life. And when he comes out not only is he the perfect leader but everyones down with the guy who wanted to run away before.

Now, compare to cartoon Prime, as soon as he's rebuilt as optimus he's the kick arse no nonsense John Wayne guy he always was ("You're worst nightmare"). In the Marvel comic, by the time he became in a position to take over he was already a top notch general and leader (and if memory serves, one of the nice things about ...And there shall come A Leader is the implication Optimus has been manipulating events behind the scenes for a while to get the Council to give him executive control).

That isn't to say the DW take is inherently wrong or bad (I rather like his more scholarly leanings, even if the execution failed somewhat), it's a new take for a new continuity. But it's easy to why people, especially those who haven't read Furman before, would find it untrue to the character as portrayed in other media.

It's also worth remembering that marvel Prime and cartoon Prime, despite shariong many similarities, are actually surprisingly different characters. It's not as blatant as the differences between the two medias take on say, Soundwave, but the Marvel Prime is a much more conflicted and self doubting character (especially as written by Furman). The difference basically boils down to one key moment, in the cartoon the Ark crashes into Earth by accident, in the comic it's a deliberate choice by Prime and that pretty much haunts him right up to the end.

Another example: Have you been watching the new Battlestar Galactica?. Look at President Roslyn. She was a lowly education department employee, a minor political position before the Cylons attacked and killed the entire Presidential heirarchy. She was suddenly thrust into position of President and had to learn the ropes along the way.

Yet despite some self doubt and having to prove herself, she does a pretty damn good job of it right from the get go (and education minister isn't that lowly a position, certainly not in the UK Government anyway). She's the first one to realise the war is lost, the first to realise the importance of procreation and so on. She's probably a better political leader in those early days than she is later on when the religious visions start to grab her (she's ultimately vindicated in her believe in the arrow, but the way she handles the situation nearly buggers up things for the whole fleet, it's Adama's choice to reunify the two groups that pretty much saves the situation).

The Matrix seems to specifically attune itself to an Autobot who is relatively "innocent" in the ways of war and leadership.


Except in the Marvel comic, for at least one example.

EDIT: Oh, and no spoilers for past the half way point of season 2 of BSG from anyone please.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 09:08 PM
I never said they don't (though Alexander the Great was pretty much an exception to that rule), just that by the time they did become generals/commanders/leaders ect they were. The point is though, that they were not thrust into postions of authority without any experience. Prime was.



Part of the problem with War Within is that we don't really see Prime settle into the leadership position, he pisses of his troops, falls into a big hole with Megatron (where he somehow does a Jedi mind trick on him) and sees some crap waste of page Easter eggs that someone totally change his outlook on life. And when he comes out not only is he the perfect leader but everyones down with the guy who wanted to run away before. Notreally. What he has is a "batism by fire". He learns how to be la leader the hard way, and through his battle with Megatron realizes exactly what the Autobots are fighting for and why it is important to save Cybertron.It is that crucible which forces a change in Prime and garners the respect of his subordinates.

Now, compare to cartoon Prime, as soon as he's rebuilt as optimus he's the kick arse no nonsense John Wayne guy he always was ("You're worst nightmare"). In the Marvel comic, by the time he became in a position to take over he was already a top notch general and leader (and if memory serves, one of the nice things about ...And there shall come A Leader is the implication Optimus has been manipulating events behind the scenes for a while to get the Council to give him executive control). In War Dawn, when Orion Pax is rebuilt, he isn't shown to automaticlally be a great leader. He is shown to be a powerful warrior and a PO'd one at that. We never see his development into a leader of troops. In Marvel, Prime was given the benefit of experience before taking on the mantle of leadership. He wasn't in DW.

That isn't to say the DW take is inherently wrong or bad (I rather like his more scholarly leanings, even if the execution failed somewhat), it's a new take for a new continuity. But it's easy to why people, especially those who haven't read Furman before, would find it untrue to the character as portrayed in other media. I disagree. It is very true to the character because it shows why he became the type of leader he would eventually grow into being. It shows the context. Thus, no, I dn't find it easy to see why people would find that "untrue" to the character.

It's also worth remembering that marvel Prime and cartoon Prime, despite shariong many similarities, are actually surprisingly different characters. It's not as blatant as the differences between the two medias take on say, Soundwave, but the Marvel Prime is a much more conflicted and self doubting character (especially as written by Furman). The difference basically boils down to one key moment, in the cartoon the Ark crashes into Earth by accident, in the comic it's a deliberate choice by Prime and that pretty much haunts him right up to the end. Very true, but at the heart, he is still the same character with the same values. And it is those values which drives his every choice and every action.



Yet despite some self doubt and having to prove herself, she does a pretty damn good job of it right from the get go (and education minister isn't that lowly a position, certainly not in the UK Government anyway). She's the first one to realise the war is lost, the first to realise the importance of procreation and so on. She's probably a better political leader in those early days than she is later on when the religious visions start to grab her (she's ultimately vindicated in her believe in the arrow, but the way she handles the situation nearly buggers up things for the whole fleet, it's Adama's choice to reunify the two groups that pretty much saves the situation). She still has to struggle and grow into the role, and win the pwople's confidence, particularly Adama's. Did you watch the two specials they had on this past Friday? The first went into her development as a leader and in her relationship with Adama, among other aspects of the show.




Except in the Marvel comic, for at least one example. Maybe, maybe not, but that is the only example. In the cartoon, it is certainly the case.

EDIT: Oh, and no spoilers for past the half way point of season 2 of BSG from anyone please.
A little behind are we?:devil:

Denyer
2008-03-31, 09:51 PM
Hasbro established Carnivac as a crazed lutatic in his toy bio on the back of the package in his tech spec. It was Marvel that changed it,
[...]
It all came from Hasbro, from the original toy concepts.
Marvel created Carnivac -- Budiansky alone was responsible for most of the first five years or so of character tech specs and profiles, and has gone on-record to state as much.

The chosen Matrix bearer always seems to be someone who is new and untested.
Hot Rod. War Within Optimus. Thunderwing?

There isn't even a physical matrix until the animated movie, it's said to be encoded into Autobot leaders. Whereas in Japanese show continuity there are various matrices that are given to leaders, and in recent years and continuities there've been a proliferation of other ones.

The Luke-Skywalker-character-suddenly-gets-an-upgrade schtick has been applied fairly moderately, all things considered, as has the notion that matrices are self-aware items that choose their bearers.

he is still the same character with the same values
Adam West Batman is the same character with the same values as most of the comic incarnations, but they're still quite different.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 10:01 PM
Yeah, like how Primes universes over seem to have the same values in every different continuity. They're all valuers of freedom, justice, etc, value life wherever they may find it, but have different characteristics, like how Budiansky's Prime is a strong leader, Furman's Prime is doubtful (In the US comics, at least), in the cartoon, he's powerful, fearsome and wise, etc.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 10:11 PM
Marvel created Carnivac -- Budiansky alone was responsible for most of the first five years or so of character tech specs and profiles, and has gone on-record to state as much. Yes, he was. He wrote those bios for Hasbro. Hasbro created the character Marvel used the character at the behest of Hasbro. Budiansky wrote the bios at the behest of Hasbro, not at the behest of Marvel. Therefore, Hasbro created Carnivac, not Marvel.


Hot Rod. War Within Optimus. Thunderwing? Hot Rod, a callow youth, inexperienced and untested. Optronix, and archivist with no combat or comand experience. Orion Pax, a dock worker also with no experience in the ways of war.

There isn't even a physical matrix until the animated movie, it's said to be encoded into Autobot leaders. Whereas in Japanese show continuity there are various matrices that are given to leaders, and in recent years and continuities there've been a proliferation of other ones.

The Luke-Skywalker-character-suddenly-gets-an-upgrade schtick has been applied fairly moderately, all things considered, as has the notion that matrices are self-aware items that choose their bearers.The "Luke Skywalker"-character sudeenly thrust into a positon of power is classic Myth. Look at King Arthur, look at King David. It's the same premise.


Adam West Batman is the same character with the same values as most of the comic incarnations, but they're still quite different.More than you know. Prime, on the other hand is pretty consistant.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 10:16 PM
:lies:

Tramp
2008-03-31, 10:20 PM
:lies:

Wrong. 100% truth.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 10:31 PM
Once again: Don't bloody bold at me, slappy. Secondly, yes, lies. Optimuses (Optimii?) are very diverse. Did the Cartoon Prime ever exhibit Leadership issues? Hell no. He did in the comics. Every Prime shares the same general fundimentals, but they are very, very different if you pay attention.

Denyer
2008-03-31, 10:32 PM
Budiansky wrote the bios at the behest of Hasbro, not at the behest of Marvel. Therefore, Hasbro created Carnivac, not Marvel.

Bullshit. Marvel were contracted to provide that material, and they did so by assigning Shooter and Budiansky (amongst others, such as Denny O'Neil) to do it for them. It was a follow-up to development Marvel had already been contracted for on G.I. Joe. [* (http://electric-escape.net/node/590)]

Orion Pax, a dock worker also with no experience in the ways of war.
Yeah, that was a brilliant scene in War Dawn where Pax was chosen by the matrix. Some of the best animation seen in the original show, and it was impressive how they worked around the fact Prime was dismantled before the movie and didn't have the matrix...

is classic Myth
Funny how 'classic' is so often interchangeable with hackneyed, derivative, unoriginal.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 10:36 PM
Who else wants to bet the word "Retcon" will be incorrectly used in response to the orion Pax point?

Denyer
2008-03-31, 10:40 PM
Hasbro didn't even come up with the name Transformers; that came from Griffin-Bacal. (This hasn't stopped Aaron Archer trying to rewrite history, mind... though you could assume he was was referring to the decision that the toyline should have a backstory, which was Hasbro's real innovation -- they were one of the first toy companies to contest the restrictions on advertising -- and crediting Orenstein with that. Diaclone already had a limited presence in the US before Transformers added marketing.)

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 10:54 PM
Heh, that's some interesting info there.

secretcode
2008-03-31, 11:25 PM
Who else wants to bet the word "Retcon" will be incorrectly used in response to the orion Pax point?

Retcons are now a minor subfaction in relationship to the Autobots.

Tramp
2008-03-31, 11:25 PM
Bullshit. Marvel were contracted to provide that material, and they did so by assigning Shooter and Budiansky (amongst others, such as Denny O'Neil) to do it for them. It was a follow-up to development Marvel had already been contracted for on G.I. Joe. [* (http://electric-escape.net/node/590)] The key word in that statement is contracted. Hasbro contracted Budianski and Marvel to write those bios and backstory, and the promotional comic series.. It wasn't Marvel's concept. It was Hasbro's.


Yeah, that was a brilliant scene in War Dawn where Pax was chosen by the matrix. Some of the best animation seen in the original show, and it was impressive how they worked around the fact Prime was dismantled before the movie and didn't have the matrix... First off, we don't see him get the matrix, secondly, when he was "dismantled", his chest wasn't opened up. There is nothing in those episodes which contradicts him having the Matrix at those times. Yes, the concept of the matrix hadn't been added yet, but it was retroactively established that he had the Matrix already.


Funny how 'classic' is so often interchangeable with hackneyed, derivative, unoriginal. There is no such thing as a truely "original" concept; just a new spin on an old one.

Once again: Don't bloody bold at me, slappy. Secondly, yes, lies. Optimuses (Optimii?) are very diverse. Did the Cartoon Prime ever exhibit Leadership issues? Hell no. He did in the comics. Every Prime shares the same general fundimentals, but they are very, very different if you pay attention. Di we see Prime's early years as leader in the cartoon? No. Did we see his early years in Marvel? No. We never saw Prime's development as a leader We never see him grow into the leader he would become. We never saw his "leadership issues" because we never saw his growth as a leader. We saw him established already as a great leader. His early development was never dealt with. War Within dealt with his early development.

Damolisher
2008-03-31, 11:39 PM
See? Told ya he'd deliberately misuse the term retcon.

And in response to your reply to my statement about Prime, Tramp, I MEANT the Marvel G1 comics, but clearly, you need help figuring that out. Prime in the US comics had been the leader of the Autobots for a while, and was still exhibiting self-doubt and was making screw-ups, and dealing with the burden of leadership when it came to teaming up with Scoropnok, etc. If you "Own the US comics" which you constantly say you do, which, going by you means you can recall everything perfectly, and makes you infallible, you'd know this.

And if you knew as much as you wish you did, he who must always be right, you'd be able to understand that Dreamwave's Prime is a different character to either of these.

Tramp
2008-04-01, 12:11 AM
See? Told ya he'd deliberately misuse the term retcon. Damolisher, I am not misusing the word retcon: In general usage, "retcon" refers to a new development in a story that changes the interpretation of past stories in a way that the original story-writer almost certainly did not intend at that time. In the most dramatic cases, it can also refer to a new development which contradicts and overrides some aspect of, or the entirety of, an earlier story. http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Retcon Try again. The addition of the Matrix as having been in Prime's posession since War Dawn is a retcon and as a result of that retcon, he was given the Matrix by Alpha Trion while he was being rebuilt.

And in response to your reply to my statement about Prime, Tramp, I MEANT the Marvel G1 comics, but clearly, you need help figuring that out. Prime in the US comics had been the leader of the Autobots for a while, and was still exhibiting self-doubt and was making screw-ups, and dealing with the burden of leadership when it came to teaming up with Scoropnok, etc. If you "Own the US comics" which you constantly say you do, which, going by you means you can recall everything perfectly, and makes you infallible, you'd know this. He didn't start having self-doubt until later in the series when the threat of Unicron arose. Prime has never been "infallible" in either the cartoon, nor comics. The difference is in the choices he made in the different series and how those choices and situations affected him. Prime in the cartoon didn't make the same choices or have the same circumstances as he did in the comics. Thus, his reactions and behaviors were different. If you placed catrtoon Prime in exactly the same situations as Marvel comcis Prime, the reactions and self-doubt woiuld be the same. That is because they are the same character at the core.

And if you knew as much as you wish you did, he who must always be right, you'd be able to understand that Dreamwave's Prime is a different character to either of these.No, he isn't. He is different interpretations of the same character.

Denyer
2008-04-01, 12:11 AM
The key word in that statement is contracted.
The person who creates something is the person that created it, not who paid. Creation and ownership aren't synonyms.

Budiansky was employed by Marvel. Marvel was employed by Hasbro. That's two levels of separation -- Hasbro started off by buying existing toy moulds and paying other people to create characters to attach. For the movie, they made the mistake of paying other people to create characters then made the toys around those designs (moving away from the concept of realistic vehicles and items, which those involved considered in retrospect a mistake.) After the movie, they went to creating the toys (in collaboration with Takara) and paying people to create characters to attach...

War Within dealt with his early development.
It dealt with a span of time in which a clerk was given an instant upgrade and attacked almost immediately by Megatron. He sees a few visions and decides not to abandon Cybertron.

Did we see his early years in Marvel? No. We never saw Prime's development as a leader
State Games, And There Shall Come A Leader, What's In A Name, flashbacks during the Underbase Saga, flashbacks during Furman's Decepticon Civil War arc. Off the top of my head.

Tramp
2008-04-01, 12:24 AM
The person who creates something is the person that created it, not who paid. Creation and ownership aren't synonyms.

Budiansky was employed by Marvel. Marvel was employed by Hasbro. That's two levels of separation -- Hasbro started off by buying existing toy moulds and paying other people to create characters to attach. For the movie, they made the mistake of paying other people to create characters then made the toys around those designs (moving away from the concept of realistic vehicles and items, which those involved considered in retrospect a mistake.) After the movie, they went to creating the toys (in collaboration with Takara) and paying people to create characters to attach... I know how the creative process works and "work for Hire". I'm in that business, remember? I'm and illustrator and graphic designer by trade. The concept wqas Hasbro's. They hired and contracted creative people to flesh out these characters and create a story for them. Hasbro also had full creative control and had final say over what was acceptible or not. Thus, Hasbro is the originator and owner.

It dealt with a span of time in which a clerk was given an instant upgrade and attacked almost immediately by Megatron. He sees a few visions and decides not to abandon Cybertron. Exactly. We are still seeing only the beginings of his development into a leader. Even after that, he stillhasn't grown fully into his role. That would still take time. What that story had established is his resolve to fight.


State Games, And There Shall Come A Leader, What's In A Name, flashbacks during the Underbase Saga, flashbacks during Furman's Decepticon Civil War arc. Off the top of my head.all of which are only snippits, not his full development. We still don't see the whole story. Yes, in thise stories he had more experience before becoming Leader, and that helps, but we still don't really know how much experience he had. Was he equivalent to a 2nd Lieutenant or a Colonel? Was his command experience that of someone who had only commanded a squad or full Brigades? That makes a huge difference.

Oh, and as far as retcons go:

6-17: WHAT IS A "RETCON"?

To retroactively change the continuity of a character or title. The first
known use of the term "retroactive continuity" was in the letter column of
ALL-STAR SQUARDRON #18. (Roy Thomas wrote that he first heard it at a convention.) Coined by Damian Cugley, "retcon" is a shortening or
verbification of "retroactive continuity."

Originally, "retcon" meant that the interpretation of "facts" from earlier
stories is changed, but the facts themselves are preserved. For example, Alan Moore took Swamp Thing, previously thought to be a man transformed into a plant creature, and with minimal changes to previous stories, made Swamp Thing a "plant elemental" with a dead man's memories.

These days, retcon has also come to mean changes to history itself, so that something that had existed in the fictional universe, not only doesn't
exist now, but never has existed. For example, Batman caught his parents' killer, Joe Chill, years ago. But the ZERO HOUR story retconned it, so he has never found the killer.

This bit of comics jargon seems to be slowly seeping into the culture at
large. In the past few years, "retcon" has shown up in several dictionaries of new words, and has begun to be used outside the comics business. found here: http://users.rcn.com/kateshort/faqs/miscfaq6.htm

This also means that something can be retroactively added into a story's continuity that wasn't in it before, which includes Prime having being given the Matrix in War Dawn.

Aardvark
2008-04-01, 12:34 AM
Police Academy.

Comprende?

Denyer
2008-04-01, 12:58 AM
The concept wqas Hasbro's.
With input from Griffin-Bacal. They did not create most of the characters.

I know how the creative process works and "work for Hire". I'm in that business, remember?
I remember you saying you were trying to break into it. If we're waving our cocks around in public in the foolhardy belief that it means something, one of us has had work solicited and published on a licensed Transformers product -- so stop trying to patronise myself and other people.

Hasbro did not create the majority of characters for Transformers for at least the first five years. They paid other people to do that work for them.

Did we see his early years in Marvel? No.
We never saw Prime's development as a leader
[list of stories showing development of Prime as a leader]
all of which are only snippits, not his full development
We saw early years in Marvel, at different time points, and saw his development as a leader. Whether that development is as full and detailed as you want is an entirely different matter.

Was he equivalent to a 2nd Lieutenant or a Colonel? Was his command experience that of someone who had only commanded a squad or full Brigades? That makes a huge difference.
Possibly if you're writing a biopic of military campaigns. If you were writing a Hello magazine feature, you might be more interested in his favourite colour, or what he thinks of interstellar fashion.

Tramp
2008-04-01, 01:19 AM
With input from Griffin-Bacal. They did not create most of the characters.[quote] Who foot the bill? Who ordered the work? Who had final say? The answer to all three is Hasbro. They had fill creative control. Everything had to be approved through them first.


[quote]I remember you saying you were trying to break into it. If we're waving our cocks around in public in the foolhardy belief that it means something, one of us has had work solicited and published on a licensed Transformers product -- so stop trying to patronise myself and other people. I'm trying to break into the comcio book industry, I already work as a graphic designer and have done so for a number of years now.

Hasbro did not create the majority of characters for Transformers for at least the first five years. They paid other people to do that work for them. They still had full creative control. They still had final approval over concpts and characterizations, not Marvel, not the individual artists or writers who were hired. Hasbro was the final arbiter. Thus, as a corporate entity, and from a legal standpoint, yes, Hasbro did create these characters. They were the ones who had the control, and ordered the production.





We saw early years in Marvel, at different time points, and saw his development as a leader. Whether that development is as full and detailed as you want is an entirely different matter. We saw small pieces of the puzzle, not his full development. Yes, it was more than we had than in the cartoon, but still just a small piece.


Possibly if you're writing a biopic of military campaigns. If you were writing a Hello magazine feature, you might be more interested in his favourite colour, or what he thinks of interstellar fashion.No. From a very real, practical perspective. I was in the US Army and served in Desert Storm. I have military experience and know the difference in command ability between a fresh out of the Academy Butterbar and a bird Colonel. A Second Lieutenant does not have the necessary experience to command anything higher than a single platoon. if you thrust him into respoonsibility for an entire army, he would be in way over his head. A colonel, by contrast has much greater experience and knowledge and has a much greater grasp of commanding large numbers of troops. He could easily handle the added responsibility of leading an entire army. Thus, Even in Marvel, it makes a huge difference if Prime had previously only been equivalent to a Second Lieutenant or equivalent to a Colonel before becoming Autobot Leader.

secretcode
2008-04-01, 02:03 AM
How the hell do all of these threads become arguments?

Denyer
2008-04-01, 02:17 AM
How the hell do all of these threads become arguments?
Three guesses.

Who foot the bill? Who ordered the work? Who had final say? The answer to all three is Hasbro.
And who created the characters? The people who created them.

Hasbro had the option to refuse or accept the material, or to suggest changes. By all accounts, in most cases they were happy to have found someone who could churn out reasonably distinct profiles at the rate they designed toys.

from a legal standpoint, yes, Hasbro did create these characters.
From a legal standpoint, they own that IP, having contracted the production of the material.

We also have the situation that Hasbro owns some material created by Marvel for the US comic that they can't monetise without further contracts because Marvel control likenesses in it. Circuit Breaker, for instance, was created by Budiansky as work-for-hire for Marvel. She was no less created by Budiansky because the created materials were owned by Marvel.

A colonel, by contrast has much greater experience and knowledge and has a much greater grasp of commanding large numbers of troops. He could easily handle the added responsibility of leading an entire army.
Rank sadly doesn't indicate competence. Haig and others would be a great deal more popular if it did, and more people would be alive.

We've seen Prime as a gladiator and sportsman (State Games), bodyguard to the ruler of Cybertron (ditto), in his first command as commander of the elite flying corps (What's In A Name / 1986 annual), as a lieutenant commander (Flames of Boltax), on front lines (Surrender), field commander of the Autobot army (And There Shall Come), and taking over full leadership (ditto). His progression through the ranks is confirmed to have proceeded rapidly (1986 annual profile) --

Tramp
2008-04-01, 02:38 AM
Three guesses.


And who created the characters? The people who created them.

Hasbro had the option to refuse or accept the material, or to suggest changes. By all accounts, in most cases they were happy to have found someone who could churn out reasonably distinct profiles at the rate they designed toys. Yes, and it was Hasbro who was the one who controlled that, not Marvel. Marvel was just a contractor and the writers who did the work were hired under contract with Hasbro. Thus, these characters were Hasbro characters, not Marvel characters. And these characters were often created by commitee. A single person didn't usually do all of the work on a given character. Even Budiansky stated that he wasn't alone working on these characters. Thus, from that perspective, yes, Hasbro did create these characters.Not as an idividual, but as an entity, made up of those that controlled the creation and those who were hired collectively as a whole. It was a collaborative effort, not the work of any single individual.


From a legal standpoint, they own that IP, having contracted the production of the material. Exactly. They had final say and full creative control. If a company hires me to create a character or logo, who's the one who owns the design? Who is the one who gets the credit and the ultimate profit? Who is the one who determines how that character or logo is used? That company. I simply get the fee I was contracted.

We also have the situation that Hasbro owns some material created by Marvel for the US comic that they can't monetise without further contracts because Marvel control likenesses in it. Circuit Breaker, for instance, was created by Budiansky as work-for-hire for Marvel. She was no less created by Budiansky because the created materials were owned by Marvel.Very true. They still own the Transformers characters and still control those characters development.


Rank sadly doesn't indicate competence. Haig and others would be a great deal more popular if it did, and more people would be alive. You won't get any argument from me on that regard. I know that only too well from personal experience.

We've seen Prime as a gladiator and sportsman (State Games), bodyguard to the ruler of Cybertron (ditto), in his first command as commander of the elite flying corps (What's In A Name / 1986 annual), as a lieutenant commander (Flames of Boltax), on front lines (Surrender), field commander of the Autobot army (And There Shall Come), and taking over full leadership (ditto). His progression through the ranks is confirmed to have proceeded rapidly (1986 annual profile) --In other words, he actually did rise from the ranks and had significant leadership experience equivalent to a full Bird Colonel in Marvel. That is very different from his cartoon or DW advancement where he was thrust into full Leadership with no experience. In the cartoon, he went from being a dock worker to Leader of thr Autobots. In DW he went from being an archivist to leadership. In both cases, he had no experience before being given this huge responsibility. In the cartoon, we never see how he grows into that role. We do see the beginnings of it in War Within. His growth is like that of King Arthur and King David.

inflatable dalek
2008-04-01, 07:50 AM
A little behind are we?:devil:


Have no fear though, I shall not be making grand sweeping statements about things I haven't seen as that would of course make me look like the prize pillock of Pillocksville. :devil:

Cliffjumper
2008-04-01, 01:23 PM
Wrong. 100% truth.

:lies:

Can you two please just get it together and **** so we can get all this sexual tension out of the air?

Denyer
2008-04-01, 02:02 PM
If a company hires me to create a character or logo, who's the one who owns the design? Who is the one who gets the credit and the ultimate profit? Who is the one who determines how that character or logo is used? That company. I simply get the fee I was contracted.
Yes. And the person who created it is you. You merely sign away ownership.

Imagine the words "person" and "created" in bold if it helps.

Employees at Hasbro created very little of Transformers characters or fiction during the founding years of the franchise. The directors hired people from outside the company to do the majority of that.

That is very different from his cartoon or DW advancement where he was thrust into full Leadership with no experience.
Indeed, which is a point people have been making. Marvel Prime is significantly different in that he doesn't follow a fairytale stereotype of having power and command given to him by a plot macguffin with magical overtones. We're shown his ranking progression as a leader, how he interacts with those under his command, and thus how he develops.

Chris McFeely
2008-04-01, 04:43 PM
What in the name of Christ is this thread even about now?

secretcode
2008-04-01, 04:51 PM
What in the name of Christ is this thread even about now?

Tramp trying to convince us and himself that he's right about everything.

Seriously Tramp, [snipped]

zigzagger
2008-04-01, 05:47 PM
Imagine the words "person" and "created" in bold if it helps.


I love you


....Well, until something better comes along.

inflatable dalek
2008-04-01, 06:26 PM
Somehow I managed to skip two pages of this thread yesterday without even realising. Odd that.

RE the whole created by/owned by issue (which isn't really an issue at all, it's tramp somehow confusing the two concepts)- Star Trek is owned (and was comissioned) by Paramount despite being created by Gene Roddenberry. Thunderbirds is owned by Carlton despite being created by Gerry Anderson. And Superman... well, Superman's an interesting one thanks to this recent court ruling: http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=13528

Now, in practical terms the very most that will mean is a Thunderball situation where the Siegel estate can only do a endless number of reworkings of Action Comics 1 with non DC publishers, but it shows that it is possible for work for hire writers to reclaim their creations.

In the cartoon, he went from being a dock worker to Leader of thr Autobots.

Where does it say at the end of War Dawn that Prime is Autobot leader at that point, or even if he has the Matrix? Both events could have happened millions of years later (hell, if we treat the cartoon as gospel, he didn't get the Matrix until after A Prime Problem).

I hate Denyer for having already pointed out the good half a dozen or so example of Prime's early life in the Marvel comic.


I was in the US Army and served in Desert Storm.

Gulf War Syndrome is real, what more proof do we need?

Denyer
2008-04-01, 06:37 PM
What in the name of Christ is this thread even about now?

Black being white, up being down, dogs cross-dressing as cats, etc.

A reprise:
Hasbro created Carnivac
Did we see [Optimus Prime's] early years in Marvel? No.
We never saw Prime's development as a leader

The first one's an attempt to define the creation of ideas as handing over cash rather than creating stuff, the others stem from not having read around half of the Marvel material.

But they're presented as imperative statements, therefore a handful of people who still have patience tend to call him on talking shit. It derails stuff.

More generally, I think the conversation branched off from whether character descriptions in the UG were representative of material in general featuring those characters.

Remind me to investigate how the Tachy Goes To Coventry option actually works.

Clay
2008-04-01, 07:34 PM
Bolding is mine...

Also, Prime's Characterisation has been pretty consistant throughout the ages and different incarnations. HE really isn't all that different. G1 Bludgeon is G1 Bludgeon, no matter which comic publisher's continuity he is in, at least he's supposed to be, and his characterization should be pretty consistant, IMO.

In other words, he actually did rise from the ranks and had significant leadership experience equivalent to a full Bird Colonel in Marvel. That is very different from his cartoon or DW advancement where he was thrust into full Leadership with no experience. In the cartoon, he went from being a dock worker to Leader of thr Autobots. In DW he went from being an archivist to leadership. In both cases, he had no experience before being given this huge responsibility. In the cartoon, we never see how he grows into that role. We do see the beginnings of it in War Within. His growth is like that of King Arthur and King David.

Well, what the **** is Prime, then? Pretty consistent, or very different?

Cliffjumper
2008-04-01, 07:37 PM
Well, what the **** is Prime, then? Pretty consistent, or very different?

Maybe his head will just explode, like the old Star Trek "Everything I say is a lie and I'm lying now" routine?

OH MY GOD, I'VE STILL GOT SOME BARBECUE TRANSFORM-A-SNACK LEFT!

Tramp
2008-04-01, 07:51 PM
Bolding is mine...





Well, what the **** is Prime, then? Pretty consistent, or very different?

His characterization is consistant even if his origins vary from continuity to continuity.

And Denyer, Hasbro, as a collective entity, not as an individual person, created these characters. Hasbro, as a collective entity—made up of the owner of the license, the editors and decision makers, the artists and writers hired to do the work, etc— created these characters together. It wasn't just Bob Budyanski, or any other particular individual. It was Hasbro as a collective, including the artists and writers it contracted to create these characters. Simon Furman did not create Carnivac. He did not create Thunderwing. He did not create Optimus Prime. Hasbro did using a group of artists and writers they specifcially contracted and worked with collectively.

Denyer
2008-04-01, 09:24 PM
Anyone else think Tramp has a point?

Hasbro, as a collective entity, not as an individual person, created these characters.

Hasbro as a collective entity paid another company to pay someone to do it.

Stick it up your tailpipe.

Cliffjumper
2008-04-01, 09:29 PM
Anyone else think Tramp has a point?

In this topic, or in general? I mean, my answer's the same, but I thought I'd check. Because it looks to me like he started off by getting the wrong end of the stick, then cack-handedly derailed the thread until it somehow nearly matched up with what he first said.

But then as I've never been shot at in a big desert or pitched to a company, what the Hell do I know?

Tramp
2008-04-01, 09:39 PM
Anyone else think Tramp has a point?



Hasbro as a collective entity paid another company to pay someone to do it.

Stick it up your tailpipe.
Wrong. They worked with artists and writers at Marvel, particularly Bob Budianski and other artists and writers, to create these characters. It was a collaboration. It wasn't one person doing the work and then getting paid. Bob Budianski didn't do it all on his own. Marvel didn't do it all on their own. Hasbro didn't simply pass the work off and "rubber stamp" it. They were involved in the whole process and worked together with these creative people.

Chris McFeely
2008-04-01, 10:12 PM
*blink* What happened there? Did Tramp get banned again?

Damolisher
2008-04-01, 10:18 PM
I think he might've been- I tried to check pages 4 and 5, and they just lead me back to page 3.

Denyer
2008-04-01, 10:19 PM
Just a downside of the Tachy option that's built into vBulletin when there's a running conversation. It'd make more sense if everyone logged in got the "The administrator has decided that [x] should be quiet for a while." message rather than only staff. (Not sure if that can be expanded, but I'll look...)

Quickest way to section some of the derailment caused by pigheadedly insisting words don't mean what everyone else uses them for, sweeping statements made about things as a whole, etc. Also removes the temptation/need for people to correct basic stuff.

Trading opinions is fair enough, and a good argument's fun. It's the posting in "word-of-god" toned statements that begins to get a little wearing.

Cliffjumper
2008-04-01, 10:37 PM
Plus he ignores everyone else, so there's a certain amount of sonnet comeuppance involved when the situation's reversed, I suppose.

Denyer
2008-04-01, 11:20 PM
He also talks about Metallikato in very religious terms: it's the "one true path" and Prime is a blasphemer for questioning its tenets. What any of that means is anyone's guess -- and it's certainly quite a bit different from either his Dreamwave or IDW portrayals regardless of how you interpret it -- but it definitely establishes him as something more than just a spiritually-inclined samurai.
I think it's probably a similar situation to Buddhism -- practitioners viewing it as instructional, and an example to be followed ("have I not studied the ways of the UW all my life, have I not modeled my ways on his", etc.) There's plenty of describing physical reality in more rarefied terms, but Primus isn't a matter of belief or conjecture -- he's right there in the core of Cybertron, and later dies.

Sort of like "gods" in D&D campaign settings being really powerful NPCs, rather than what Judaeo-Christian tradition would think of as a god.

He mentions that he felt Optimus Prime's 'aura' leave his body when he died, which suggests he possesses arcane powers above and beyond the telekinesis we saw in the UK comics (which could, in and of itself, be technologically generated).
Dissipation of electric impulses? From what we're given, that Prime does die. An imprint of his personality remains in the mind of his Nebulan partner. Take that along with the matrix, which he carried for a long period (and shared experiences/memories with), there's a lot of Prime encoded in those places, enough to remake him.

it's quite possible that he'd consider anyone who would allow a trap like that to kill them undeserving of an honourable death.
Feels rather like booby-trapping an opponent's weapon. Could be taken as a shift in character along the lines of Shockwave's paralysis when confronted with Unicron, I suppose -- he no longer cares (which'd be backed up by the final page of the original US comic) having come so close to death?

Aardvark
2008-04-01, 11:38 PM
Without meaning to take us off the smooth path of justice and onto the rocky road of "Nooooooooooooo!" but did you delete all of Tramp's posts? Or am I being a bit thick here?* His posts don't seem to be showing up for me.Those two threads in the Junkion files have lost a bit of meat and structure. Content is debatable. ----------> ;) <----------

Actually I protest the Junkioning of the Fembots thread. I mean they both are awful, but at least the first one has the wow factor of "Is this actually happening?" The second one is just a tired rehash. A tired rehash I say! Remove it or I'll write an angry letter to Mr. Tfarchive. :p

*I will crush those who Humorously take this out of context.

Denyer
2008-04-01, 11:43 PM
did you delete all of Tramp's posts?
Nope. It's a global ignore. If it's at all possible I'll get it to show the same for everyone the way it is here, as existing threads scan better if people have the option to read the gaps.

edit: Or at least see where they are. Which is what I think is fixed up to show now, after a partial rewrite of some forum code.

Damolisher
2008-04-02, 02:02 AM
I really wouldn't mind buying a copy of the ultimate Guide just to have a good look through. I mean, I've read a bit of it while I was at Armageddon last year in Wellington, and it looked enjoyable, but from what I read, I just thought "Man, anyone who treats this as gospel is a mook!"

Warcry
2008-04-02, 08:49 AM
I think it's probably a similar situation to Buddhism -- practitioners viewing it as instructional, and an example to be followed ("have I not studied the ways of the UW all my life, have I not modeled my ways on his", etc.) There's plenty of describing physical reality in more rarefied terms, but Primus isn't a matter of belief or conjecture -- he's right there in the core of Cybertron, and later dies.
Metallikato does seem to be much more of an individualistic philosophy/religion/whatnot than what we're used to in the Western world. That much we can guess both from Bludgeon's words and the fact that he's pretty much the only person in the G1 universe who follows it. That makes all the talk of blasphemy and destroying unbelievers all the more odd to me, though. It's usually in highly-organized religions where you see that sort of 'death to the infidels' intolerance, although at that point it could just be the stress of the moment getting to Bludgeon and bringing out a response that he otherwise would have bottled up.

Dissipation of electric impulses? From what we're given, that Prime does die.
It's the language that Bludgeon used that piqued my interest more than anything else ("No! I saw you die, felt your aura leave its mortal remains. You were no more!"). He described the first point in strictly physical terms but for the second he was moving into the realm of the metaphysical. He was probably a bit too upset at that point to be worrying about maintaining his image or expressing things poetically, which makes me think he was explaining something that (at least to Bludgeon) didn't have a physical explanation. That doesn't mean that it doesn't (I think your electrical impulses idea is probably very close to the mark) but if he was describing something that, say, Quake or Crankcase could have picked up on I don't think he would have been so fancy about it.

Feels rather like booby-trapping an opponent's weapon. Could be taken as a shift in character along the lines of Shockwave's paralysis when confronted with Unicron, I suppose -- he no longer cares (which'd be backed up by the final page of the original US comic) having come so close to death?
It's quite possible he's been changed by the experience (and really, who wouldn't be?) to the point where he sees things like that from a different perspective. His 'kill millions of humans just to piss off Prime' shtick from the G2 comics is a pretty big diversion from his UK comic roots, and this was a step along the way to there.

I think an equally-large part of the change might have been as simple as the fact that he'd become a leader and taken on all the burdens that go with that. He seemed to at least vaguely care about the wellbeing and happiness of his troops (a marked departure from most 'Con leaders), which might have led him to compromise his own ethics.

It's possible the change started earlier than that, too -- would a truly honourable warrior have used a cheap telekinetic trick to take down Inferno when he could just as easily have used TK to open the cell and faced the Autobot in battle?

Red Dave Prime
2008-04-02, 01:05 PM
Its not bad as catch ups go but the cartoon series is under represented and the comments about too much dreamwave are bang on. The thing is, it never seems sure whether its detailing things as part of a history on a toyline that also had cartoons and comics or whether its detailing the history that people created around that toyline.

Heinrad
2008-04-04, 12:54 AM
Actually, I always kind of figured Metallikato is, unintentionally, similiar to what we got as a description for the Sith from Star Wars: Episode 1 mixed with The Gathering from Highlander.

Although while the Sith wiped themselves out mainly because they were all powermad crazy people with a penchant for black leather, and the Immortals fight each other for a vaguely ill-defined "Prize", students of Metallikato come at it from this perspective:

1) I am a child of Metallikato.

2) To be a child of Metallikato, I must strive, though physical combat, to be "The Best of The Best", for that is what The Ultimate Warrior teaches. That and bad face-painting and an odd fondness for dayglo spandex tights......(which could explain Bludgeon's shell coloring)

3) After beating the lubricants out of all of the champions of the other martial arts schools out there on a regular basis, I, as a child of Metallikato, have come to the conclusion that there is only one challenge worthy of me. Namely, that child of Metallikato over there who's looking at me with the same expression I'm looking at him with.

4) Scenes of unmentionable and unimaginable violence ensue.

Heck, the fact that I've never seen Bludgeon shown, be it in G1, G2, DW-G1, War Within, whatever, as having a Decepticon emblem on him is pretty telling, I think. Well, aside from no sticker sheet being provided with the figure, anyway. The only reason he's not an Autobot is that the Autobot way doesn't jibe with being the best of the best, unless it's being the best of the best at being peaceful, at which point he's have to beat the bearings out of Beachcomber(which would then be recorded as a double loss).

Then again, there's also the fact that we haven't been inundated with students of the other schools of Cybertronian martial arts, either. We could have this same argument for Bugly and Banzai-Tron, too.

And as for the change in ethics.... well, there's a difference in him personally taking on all the Autobots alone and taking care of his troops. If he'd been alone in that cell, maybe he would have simply opened the door with t-k and proceeded to beat Inferno to a pile of broken ferro-ceramic parts and then gone through everybody else between him and the doorway out. Having troops with him, though, could simply require a change in tactics.

That being said, this kind of "road to ruin", as it were, could be why Megatron was able to take him out in G2. Sort of a "You lost who you are, and in that losing of self, you lose your life" kind of thing.

But then, to sum up what the thread was initially about: It's not a bad book, but is heavily DW-G1 biased in what should be the original G1 areas. Pictures are pretty, though.

Damolisher
2008-04-05, 06:08 AM
Well, the thing saying that Trampy should take the 5th is working now.

zigzagger
2008-04-05, 07:05 AM
Well, the thing saying that Trampy should take the 5th is working now.

So, what are you going to do now? We have other forums here, many of which Tramp hasn't contributed to. Surely he isn't your only inspiration.

Damolisher
2008-04-05, 07:29 AM
Is there are reason that the mods here seem to be so freakin' rude? If I say something wrong, then please state it politely. You all don't need to bite my freakin' head off for simply posting statements.

zigzagger
2008-04-05, 08:06 AM
Don't get me wrong, many of us have contributed to berating board members for being abrasive, rude, trollish, incompetent, etc, one time or another, but when it becomes apparent that one particular member is the primary focus of an other member's posts, I think it is just reason for moderators to express their concern, etc. My post, though I suppose was tactless, was genuinely curious as to why that was. Reviewing your posting history indicates that is the case. And whether that is your intention or not, most of the staff here tend perceive it as an attempt to get a reaction in some form or another (especially when a thread is bumped up). This impression can be easily rectified.

It's just Tramp, and it is not worth exerting your energy into. Unless you like getting angry. Post more constructively here and there won't be a problem.

Damolisher
2008-04-06, 07:52 AM
Alright, fair enough, I guess I overreacted somewhat too. But hell, I'm just looking for somewhere to "Hang out" in terms of another Transformers board after Seibertron. I'm just tired of how Tramp seems to go board to board spreading his crap, and he doesn't even attempt to change after he gets banned, he continues to act in the manner which got him banned in the first place.

I'm a Transformers fan, I just want to enjoy Transformers discussions without some overbearing lamo turning every topic into a 90 page mini novel after someone disagrees with him, simply because he doesnt' like being wrong.

I posted my last post because Either Denyer, or smeone else said something about Seeing a "Tramp should be quiet for a while" notice like the mods do, and I just thought I'd point out that it's working.

transnewbie
2008-07-30, 01:38 AM
I checked it out of the library recently. I think mine might've been outdated, because it stopped after tf:energon. I thought the info in it was cool and very informative. But the layout was distracting, and it only gave one version of back-story (pre Earth) that I'd never heard of in the g1 section. Most of which wasn't in the cartoon. I'd say, buy it if you want, but read it slowly to get everything, and you'd probably have to take notes. One thing I did learn from that was Primus and Unicron are twins. That threw me through a loop. I was geeking out about that for a week. Anyway, it does have a lot, though not all, of good info in there. But you do need a lot of patience with that book.