[Toy Design] Complexity or Simplicity

Figures, collectables, customs and collecting.

Complex or Simple

Complex
5
31%
Simple
4
25%
Don't care
7
44%
 
Total votes: 16

User avatar
Skidmark
Articles: 0
Posts: 954
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: In your base, stealing your flag
Contact:

[Toy Design] Complexity or Simplicity

Post by Skidmark » Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:47 am

What do you prefer in a transformer toy? A complex transformation scheme like the Movie line? Or the simple transformations like the Animated line?
"Some people are like slinkies, not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs."

Movies I've seen recently:
Red
Johnny Got His Gun
A Clockwork Orange
Fight Club
Toy Story 3
Zombieland
Tenacious D The Pick of destiny
Watchmen

User avatar
Energon Hot Shot
Articles: 0
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:22 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Energon Hot Shot » Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:34 am

I prefer complexity in my transformers as long as it's necessary and doesn't compromise any modes or make any pieces easy to pop off or break. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate simpler transformations.

User avatar
Treadshot A1
Articles: 0
Posts: 2411
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:49 am
Contact:

Post by Treadshot A1 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:38 am

Yeah, same here. I don't mind if it's simple, or complex, but this is on the terms that neither will hinder transformation in any way, or make pieces pop off.

Galvatron is a perfect example of where complexity went wrong. I think Topspin and Twin Twist get the prize for Simplicity gone wrong.

This is where Complexity was used correctly: http://www.toyking.com.tw/image/toy/ban ... 503htm.jpg

EDIT: Why has this been moved?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Cliffjumper
Articles: 0
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper » Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:27 pm

Treadshot A1 wrote:EDIT: Why has this been moved?
Because it's about toys. Bloody Hell, you're getting worse I think.

User avatar
Transformer Kamen
Articles: 0
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:55 am

Post by Transformer Kamen » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:07 pm

I like somewhat complex transformations. Have the fun of a transformer is figuring out how all the little bits shift around. On the other hand, I hate figures that have little bits that have to be fiddled into a precise configuration when a single piece would have worked only slight less well; but then that's usually only a few minutes of frustration when I first transform the figure, so it ends up not being a big deal anyway.

User avatar
Detective Barricade
Articles: 0
Posts: 973
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere, Canada

Post by Detective Barricade » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:19 pm

As long as the transformation is fun, it doesn't matter if it's simple (MOV Stockade, ANI Starscream) or complex (ANI Soundwave, MOV Leader Brawl) to me.
Got a complaint?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
The Complaints department: making complaints disappear since 2009!

User avatar
RID Scourge
Articles: 0
Posts: 13262
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2001 4:00 am
Location: In ur newz forum. Reading ur newz!

Post by RID Scourge » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:28 pm

I'm big on the "Keep it simple, stupid" maxim. I prefer the transformers that I can fiddle with while I'm watching a movie or using the internet.

User avatar
ganon578
Articles: 0
Posts: 2196
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:26 pm
Location: NoCo

Post by ganon578 » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:37 pm

RID Scourge wrote:I'm big on the "Keep it simple, stupid" maxim. I prefer the transformers that I can fiddle with while I'm watching a movie or using the internet.
I second that. While I appreciate all the detail and work that goes into a complex transformation, I don't want it to be a hassle for me to transform it. Usually that makes me leave the TF in one mode or another and very rarely transform him. I've been a fan of the Classics/Universe transformations so far... Not too complex, not too simple, but fun (with the exception of pain-in-the-ass Galvatron).

Either way, I think fun rules over complexity or simplicity. It's all in design.

User avatar
The Reverend
Articles: 0
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 6:26 am
Location: Knoxville, TN

Post by The Reverend » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:58 pm

I would enjoy complex transformations more if the quality and format of TF instructions hadn't gone down so severely since G1. :)

User avatar
Clay
Articles: 0
Posts: 7054
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Murray, KY

Post by Clay » Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:19 pm

I do think fun should trump both complex or simple for their own sakes. However, it would be a bit of a disappointment for something the size of Primus to be as simple as something like Windcharger.

Cliffjumper
Articles: 0
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper » Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:30 pm

Another vote for "I don't give a damn as long as it works". That said, I have to agree with Clay, toys need to have some sort of complexity relative to their size. An awful lot of Transformers don't do this - practically all the Unicron Trilogy figures were around 25% larger than the designs merited, same with... well, just about every single toy that was actually designed for Generation 1. And some of the ones they nicked from Diaclone (shitbox F-15 mould, I'm looking at you...). Recent lines, such as the Movie stuff or Classics/Universe, have cranked this back a bit, though the last couple of years of G2, RiD and the Beast series deserve a tip of the hat for really finding the balance.

Needlessly complicated transformations really piss me off, generally - Alternators and Masterpiece both make far too much effort out of simple transformations.

User avatar
Notabot
Articles: 0
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 4:15 am
Location: Lowden, IA

Post by Notabot » Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:07 pm

The Reverend wrote:I would enjoy complex transformations more if the quality and format of TF instructions hadn't gone down so severely since G1. :)
It's easy to have clear instructions when every one of them is just "Push in arms, fold up legs, flip down head, put on all the parts that make it look like a vehicle."
In all seriousness, though, I'm actually pretty impressed with the instructions of late, especially after getting some BW stuff with instructions. For the most part, the modern instructions are pretty clear and break it down step by step instead of trying to jam 5 actions into one frame. And I like how most of the time it's easy to see the exact joint that needs to be moving due to the coloring of the instructions.

User avatar
Denyer
Articles: 2
Posts: 32388
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Contact:

Post by Denyer » Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:16 pm

There's a happy medium. Generally, Classics is probably it.

User avatar
secretcode
Articles: 0
Posts: 3717
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:50 pm
Contact:

Post by secretcode » Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:19 pm

I could care less about Transformations. From Flipchangers (BW Rattrap is still one of my favs) to Holy-Shit-I'm-Going-To-Stab-Aaron-Archer Insane (I had no problems with Universe Galvatron, I'm talking more along the lines of Alt. Prime's puzzle like Robot to Vehicle) I find most of them enjoyable except for the Spychangers/G2 Gobots.
Image
Latest Hauls: Supertrain Megazord, RID Galvatron, Nightwatch Prime
TF Total: 173 ---- Non-TF: 32

Cliffjumper
Articles: 0
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper » Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:33 pm

I dunno, I like the simplicity of that particular batch... It's fun if you have a squad that can be rapidly transformed.

User avatar
secretcode
Articles: 0
Posts: 3717
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:50 pm
Contact:

Post by secretcode » Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:46 pm

On that note, I love those Micromaster Combiner Squads, particularly the Trains. The transformations are pretty basic and spychangeresque, but they do combine into a (bricky) giant robot at least.
Image
Latest Hauls: Supertrain Megazord, RID Galvatron, Nightwatch Prime
TF Total: 173 ---- Non-TF: 32

User avatar
Starfield
Protoform
Articles: 0
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:45 am
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by Starfield » Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:36 pm

Clearance issues are what quickly push a transformation from the "fun" column to the "frustrating" column for me. When, halfway through the transformation there are a bunch of parts dangling all over the place and you have to work some parts past other parts and there isn't quite enough room. Yes Universe Galvatron.

I have to vote "simple."

User avatar
Summerhayes
Articles: 0
Posts: 1384
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: Nagano, Japan

Post by Summerhayes » Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:38 pm

I say complexity, but I don't like it to be needlessly difficult. I like transformations that surprise me a little bit, rather than "fold bonnet down to make chest, pulls arms and legs out . . ."

User avatar
Skidmark
Articles: 0
Posts: 954
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: In your base, stealing your flag
Contact:

Post by Skidmark » Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:00 pm

I'm the type of guy who likes a transformer that's complex but not too complex to where you have to look at the manual for almost every step. I also hate it when you have to actually force(bend or stretch or overpower)some piece of kibble go somewhere.
"Some people are like slinkies, not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs."

Movies I've seen recently:
Red
Johnny Got His Gun
A Clockwork Orange
Fight Club
Toy Story 3
Zombieland
Tenacious D The Pick of destiny
Watchmen

User avatar
Treadshot A1
Articles: 0
Posts: 2411
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:49 am
Contact:

Post by Treadshot A1 » Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:35 am

Cliffjumper wrote:Because it's about toys. Bloody Hell, you're getting worse I think.
Oh, sorry. I thought it was moved from toys to media. Didn't realise it was the other way round.

I have to agree with the whole "fun beats transformations" thing. I think Classics 1 was pretty good at this.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Post Reply