Talk:Crosshairs (Movie)

Split?

Unlike Drift or Lockdown, I think it is worth discussing if we want to split this into Crosshairs (Movie) and Crosshairs (AOE). The TF07/DOTM character is basically G1 Crosshairs, the meticulous armourer, whilst the AOE guy is an entirely different kettle of fish - a paratrooping, running-and-gunning jerk. Thoughts? Jalaguy (talk) 11:41, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Eh, I don't think they're different enough for it to be an issue. --ItsWalky (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Eh, we saw Movie Crosshairs in movie continuity back in TROS, and he acted way differently there. I'd vote to seperate. Escargon (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Marvel and Sunbow Shockwaves also act way differently. --ItsWalky (talk) 15:14, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

To be fair, we saw Optimus in the previous movies and he was like "I have great faith in these humans", and now he's like "I'm gonna kill you, fuck you guys."KrytenKoro (talk) 16:33, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

Problem with that is that Reign of Starscream and Age of Extinction are in the same timeline. And plus, ROTF Lockdown was seen on Earth during Nefarious, and had been captured by the Initiative for years, which wouldn't of gave time for the things AOE Lockdown did. Escargon (talk) 11:28, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

Why are you assuming they're all in the same continuity? Mimi (talk) 12:10, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

All the IDW comics for the movies were written to be in the same continuity as them, and our Movie Timeline page has them listed as part of it. Escargon (talk) 12:31, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

They were written to be in continuity with their relevant movies, not Age of Extinction, and the people who make the movies don't go out of their way to be in continuity with the comics. We have two different Jhiaxuses in Marvel Comic continuities; we can also have two different Lockdowns in movie continuities. Our articles are not official proclamations on anything. Mimi (talk) 13:04, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

Some of the books and comics have had the "official" label slapped on them on marketing, which is why they're taken as part of the same timeline. Is Lockdown's timeline that big an issue though? He could have been captured by the Initiative a week before Nefarious for all we know. -- Charles RB (talk) 10:49, 30 June 2014 (GMT)

I think they should be split. There's absolutely nothing connecting AOE Crosshairs to the previous one except the name, and I find this article's character write-up ridiculous, pretending the two different personalities are some sort of character development. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 11:41, 1 July 2014 (EDT)

To further elobrate: Even if we don't split the article (still think we should), then I think the intro needs a major rewrite. Anyone who saw Crosshairs in AOE and decided to look him up to see if there's anything else to learn about him would be presented with a sort of false narrative about how he used to be this completely different type of character and has only recently changed into the asshole we saw in the movie. Making up a non-existant character arc is not something we should be doing. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 09:01, 3 July 2014 (EDT)

Anyone else have any opinions on this? --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 08:31, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

We should definitely move EDIT: I meant split. Escargon (talk) 08:34, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

We gave movie Crankcase and DOTM Crankcase their own separate pages, so why not this guy? Granted, part of it was that movie Crankcase was unquestionably dead. But I think this is the same scenario more or less. Spark Mandrill (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

If Movie and AoE Crosshairs get split, Armada and Cybertron Thundercracker should get split as well. BattleBlade (talk) 08:09, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

I think that issue should be discussed on its own talk page. But yeah, this one should be split. Item42 (talk) 10:02, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

I find Kil's argument highly persuasive. I've never been too comfortable with these "But recently he has started to..." writeups, especially when it's trying to reconcile a minor character from a few franchises back with an on-screen dude who was clearly written without the minor character in mind at all. -- Repowers (talk) 10:36, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

↑ This. - SanityOrMadness (talk) 10:54, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

I agree, why should the wiki attempt to consolidate the two different characters when they are clearly not written to be the same character. --TheSpartanD (talk) 11:04, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

Yeah, if there was any evidence that AOE Crosshairs drew from G1 Crosshairs (even just being an armourer or something), I could deal with keeping them merged, a la TF07 PSP Hound/AOE Hound, TF07 PSP Sideswipe/ROTF Sideswipe, etc., but as it is, the AOE character is an entirely original creation. Jalaguy (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2014 (EDT)

I feel like they're way too different to keep as the same guy. One's a cool-headed armorer who's all about moderating ammo usage, paperwork, and all that jazz. The other... not so much. Yeah, they have the same paint color, but that's about it. Aside from that, they're so different that it feels impossible for them to be the same dude. Also, this is my first time commenting on anything in the Wiki. My apologies if I mess up in some way while doing so. AmazingMrCat (talk) 11:13, 28 July 2014 (EDT) (User:AmazingMrCat)

I'm of the opinion that they should probably stay on the same page - it's not as if they're as different as, say Marvel Scorponok, Rebirth Scorponok and Headmasters Scorponok. Though I do think Repowers has a point about the intro - we could rewrite it to something more neutral, like "As an armourer, Crosshairs is meticulous etc. As a paratrooper, he's gung-ho etc." and add a note (like we do on Scorponok's page) that explains that he's shown different personalities in different media. --Emvee (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2014 (EDT)

There is a fundamental difference with the examples of Shockwave and Scorponok: those competing, differing versions were based on the same toy, released at around the same time. Differing personalities, yes, but all representing one toy character. With Crosshairs, you had the one guy who had the armorer bio and comic appearances, then the AOE filmakers created this completely different character years later, nothing to do with the other Crosshairs at all as his concept art name was just "Corvette." He's an original character they created for the movie, who at some point got the same name slapped on him. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 19:59, 28 July 2014 (EDT)

Agreed, split. Titan's latest issue did a Crosshairs profile and they clearly used this wiki to look stuff up because they gave him the "careful bureacrat weaponeer" personality: when the page has gummed up official material, it's tie to split. -- Charles RB (talk) 10:56, 30 June 2014 (GMT)

If official material has now presented this synthesis doesn't that make it canon and render any discussion of a split moot? --Khajidha (talk) 08:37, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

Unfortunaty not: the bio for Crosshairs says he's careful and bureacratic in the present sense (instead of "he used to be"), while the strip shows him being cocky and going after three-on-one odds. It's a clear gaff. -- Charles RB (talk) 14:30, 30 June 2014 (GMT)

What we need here is a little John Barber. - Chris McFeely (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

"Crosshairs lightened up after hanging out with Sgt Auggie Cahnay!" -- Charles RB (talk) 14:31, 30 June 2014 (GMT)

Hahahaha, what McFeely said --Emvee (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

Highly agree on a split, Movie Crosshairs is basically the G1 dude's bio, and his fiction portrayal basically has him be this gruff dude with an ax. Age of Extinction Crosshairs has nothing similar to G1 Crosshairs, being a maverick asshole paratrooper who part-times as a saboteur. DOTM Crosshairs can go either way, but I do find AOE and Movie Crosshairs to be really different enough to warrant a split. Blackjack (talk) 10:57, 30 July 2014 (EDT)

Rewrote the intro to accommodate his AOE appearance, will that suffice? I was the one who really expanded the "recently he's become a jerk" paragraph, so I figured I should fix it.Chopperface (talk) 01:57, 9 August 2014 (EDT)

No, it did not fix it it made it worse, so I reverted it. This article is Crosshairs (Movie), and just taking all the stuff about his personality out isn't addressing the issue at all. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 07:15, 9 August 2014 (EDT)

Somebody just split the damn thing already. -- Repowers (talk) 10:30, 9 August 2014 (EDT)

Sure, whatevs. --ItsWalky (talk) 11:34, 9 August 2014 (EDT)

I can do it when I get home in a few hours, if it's not been done by then. Jalaguy (talk) 13:02, 9 August 2014 (EDT)

Hand grenades

The little "pistols" that the AoE Generations toy comes with aren't pistols, if you look closely they're little grenades - they've even got countdown timers molded on them.

His package refers to them as sidearms. Plus his instructions and stock photos clearly show him holding his accessories as guns, not as grenades. That being said, I can see what looks like a timer. And he can hold them like a grenade. But they're meant to be pistols. Besides, he used those more in the movie than grenades. Spark Mandrill (talk) 15:42, 5 July 2014 (EDT)

Fair enough, but the "post" for him to hold them as pistols is hilariously short, to the point that he can barely hold them. The post is useful really only for storage under his duster. I do think the description is a pretty good compromise though. :) Xenomrph (talk) 14:32, 18 July 2014 (EDT)