Quote:
Originally posted by Flesh_Eatin_Bacteria
Okay, I am going to assume you didn't just implicitly threaten to ban me with your comment that:
"It's just that we've had far too many G1 fanboys who come in, scream about how everything post-1986 is crap and eventually end up getting banned because they can't handle the fact that people are disagreeing with them."
|
Just explaining why many have the attitude that I do. I don't have the power to ban anyone. And I certainly wouldn't even consider banning you for anything you've said thus far. Why do you keep assuming the worst in everything I say?
Quote:
I will agree that the Power Rangers sells well, but the Power Rangers occupies its own niche in the market, to attempt to copy it when you already have a viable original product is folly.
|
It may be folly in your opinion, but imitation is an idea used by pretty much all big corporations. Smaller companies who need to carve their own niche are usually the ones who are the innovators. When their innovation does well, the larger corporations go on the copycat bandwagon or buy them out. It holds true for almost every industry, so it makes sense that it would hold true for the toy industry as well. The copycats rarely sell better than the originals, but that doesn't seem to stop people of the corporate mindset from thinking that "this time will be the time it works."
Quote:
In the past when the Transformers product waned it was because of two things:
1) The quality of the toy decreased signifantly. When you go from an accurate representation of a Porche that turns into a robot with crome parts and firing missiles to a toy that turns from something that isn't even a real vehicle, to robot form that is barely discernable as humanoid, you've dropped the ball on quality. That happened in 1988 to the transformers. That was a big nail in the coffin, but the marketing execs just decided that nobody like transforming robots anymore and stopped selling for awhile after that.
|
I couldn't agree more that the quality of post-movie releases was vastly inferior to that of pre-movie releases. I always attributed it to the fact that the original designs were made with the vehicle mode in mind first, then the robot was designed from there. In post-movie it seemed as if the robot mode was designed first, then the vehicle mode was made to accomodate that. It didn't help that plastic was used to replace rubber and metal as well. Keep this in mind -- the original Diaclone molds used for most of the 1984-85 toys were designed in the late '70s and very early '80s, when licensing wasn't as big a deal as it is nowadays. They had to stop using accurate vehicle modes to avoid paying licensing fees to the car companies whose models were used. This sucks, but again, they're in the business of making money. And using futuristic vehicle modes worked for a year or two...
Quote:
2) Lack of versatility. All though I don't think the continuity needs to be scrapped every year, it does help to change themes and introduce Dinosaurs or Beast forms to keep things fresh.
|
I can understand the need for continuity between lines, but it also alienates newer people trying to hop in story-wise. If you're a comic book fan, it's akin to Marvel's "Ultimate" line where it's the same situations, just different settings and different personalities for the characters. It's worked, in my opinion.
Quote:
However the original Transformers did have an element that the current incarnation lacked. BTW the current incarnation is superior by the above points to what was being marketed 1987 to 1990. The element I speak of that is absent in the current toy is story telling.
Good story writing is very important and the cartoons on today totally neglect this. They have shallow character development, poor continuity, and no discernable moral themes. In my opinion that hurts the product.
|
If you're comparing the cartoons of today to the original G1 cartoons, you're going be sorely disappointed when you go to the G1 cartoon/comic forum. A lot of people (myself included, to a certain extent) regard the original cartoon as utter garbage, and they regard it as such for exactly the reasons you've just mentioned. Include the myriad of animation errors to the mix, too. Energon and Armada aren't exactly the pinnacle of cartoon writing, but at least they've tried to tell one coherent story where actions of the previous week's episode are acknowledged and mean something in this week's episode (most of the time.)
Quote:
And the Power Rangers is a terrible product in my opinion. The fact that because everyone does this or everyone does that it must be good is a fallacy of reasoning; 'argumentum ad populum'. An argument is sound based on whether or not its premises are sound and the arguments constructed based on those premises are also sound. Whether or not every one in the room agrees is irrelevent, especially considering that some people in the room may not have passed algebra. (don't assume I'm insulting anyone, I'm just making a general point)
Crack is also very popular and I happen to think it is terrible product too.
|
I agree with you completely there. I'm not saying it makes it good, I'm saying that if an executive looks at toyline A and sees that its story is great but it's not selling anything then looks at toyline B and sees that the story sucks but it's selling like hotcakes, which one do you think he's going to want his new toyline to emulate? Whichever one is going to make him the most money. Again, going back to the big corporation copycat syndrome.
Quote:
My point about Archer is that by undercutting the quality of the product to make money 'right this minute' he is actually going to wind up making less money in the future by damaging the credibility and quality of the product.
|
Well, to be honest, apart from our little hardcore fanbase, there really isn't anyone that cares about the quality of the product's storyline all that much. The quality parents care about more is whether or not the new robot car thing the bought little Timmy is going to break the first time he plays with it or not. I'd say most of the G1 line would fail that quality test pretty quickly. And who knows, in 20 years' time little Timmy may be looking on eBay for all those old Energon toys he used to play with when he was little. He'll probably find a lot more in better condition than I've found most of the G1 guys I've wanted...
A mod may want to split this discussion off from the original topic, I do like the tech specs and don't want to distract from them too much since this sort of discussion isn't something that goes in the creative forum.