Talk:Optimus Prime (G1)/toys

20TH/MP

It's a little detail, but the pic used for the 20TH Anniversary MasterPiece Convoy Optimus Prime is kind of wrong: I think it's a testshot model that has never been sold (battle damage with long stacks and wrong light's feet colors) Also, he is a lille misstransformed as the matrix "hidder" is on the wrong side.

Its a stock photo of one of the longstack protos Hasbro keeps using for promotional images. I chose these photos because its hard to find stock photos of the actual product (I don't want to use somebody else's photos), and they're actually photographed pretty well, with no major posing or transformation problems aside from the bumper in his chest. --FFN 20:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The errors should be noted, though, so we know we have to replace this photo eventually. --ItsWalky 20:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd prefer a really good photo, since its the best toy he has, so might as well get the best pics possible. --FFN 20:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you think we could take a remy pic?

The text for the Masterpiece/20th Prime is a bit... um... --M Sipher 22:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Accurate?

Abit what? I believe I wrote that at 4am. --FFN 10:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I recently got this and thought there was somet stuff worth noting... I don't know whether I've got what is now the standard, or something specifically "UK". I ordered it off Amazon UK and I've seen the same thing in Forbidden Planet here. Anyway, whatever it is, it has the small smoke stacks, no shiny chromy bits, and much more simplistic paintwork than the battledamaged US release. The Ion Blaster is also a mix of blue, silver and yellow as opposed to black or grey. Oh it comes with a talking stand too, although it's rather obviously not Peter Cullen they recorded... Something I was also curious about is the pair of voice communicators in his arms. On mine he has a sticker of Grimlock on the right, and Megatron on the left, however, the box shows Starscream. Is there just a random assortment that varies from item to item? Well, anyway, I, umm, thought some of this information might be pertinent. Sorry if this isn't the right place to bring this stuff up. DS (sorry, no account) 82.69.45.136 10:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

That's the Classics DVD version. check here. --FFN 11:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Just got MP-1. Mine came with Grimlock on the right and Megatron on the left wrist communicator. --Thecrookedman 8:35 PM, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Classics

The entry for Classics Voyager Optimus Prime (and the matching entry at Ultra Magnus (G1)) claims that his two guns "can combine together to form a back-mounted shoulder weapon." I've never heard of Classics Prime having such a feature, at least not officially. Can somebody confirm or deny? --Andrusi 23:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It's true - you leave the wind vane attached to his back, and you can then plug the smokestacks into that, and angle the whole shebang up over his shoulders to make a twin cannon. It's official an' in his instructions and stuff. - Chris McFeely 23:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I never knew that. Cool. --Andrusi 04:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Flat character

I always thought so. Compared with Megatron, he had no charisma. He was wayyyy too honorable, level-headed, mature, just, wise, noble, etc.. *blech*71.34.68.213 21:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry Prime wasn't evil enough for your tastes, but as far as I can tell that doesn't have anything to do with his toy... --Andrusi 23:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Merchandise

What about this guy? --Andrusi 14:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Revoltech

Shouldn't Revoltech be in merchandise? I moved it in that section, but someone else move it back in toys without explaining why.

By what possible definition is a Revoltech action figure not a toy and a 3" Titanium figure a toy? --Rotty 20:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I know, but Titanium has transformable toys, at least. I think the best definition would be toys=sold directly by Hasbro/takara, that would make Revoltech a merchandise. But what about McDonald Toys, then? Anyway, even if the difference between Merchandise and toys became kind of blur for Mc Donald, Titanium Series, and Even Action Master, Revoltech is not sell directly by Takara/Hasbro, and neither does it transform. Which clearly set him in Merchandise at the same title than "Metal Force"--GUIGUI 21:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Um, wow. I know we have some idiosyncratic definitions on this Wiki (like "Comics-only character"), but I'd be very much against creating our own peculiar definition of TOY that's "sold by Takara/Hasbro". And "there's a toy that transforms in the package" as a definition would suddenly make 99% of my G.I. Joe collection not toys... --Rotty 21:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Titaniums are directly sold by Hasbro in the same way the Kenner-branded Beast Wars and Machine Wars were. Plus, most of the characters with 3" Titaniums I've seen have them under "merchandise". Puls, while the Action Master figures (usually) didn't transform, their weapons or vehicles did, and they were a mainline to boot. However, there's also guys like Enemy, who has a transforming toy, but said toy is bolted to a radio that keeps his legs pointed outward. --FortMax 21:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

...In the Transformers line, Of course I don't know why I should even precise that. And I don't want to create my own definition of Merchandise/Toys differentiation, I want one to be officially created, by general consensus (unless there is already one? If so a link to it would be appreciated)! That's why I Talk about it in the Discussion part: What make a Merchandise and what make a Toy? And in which category should Revoltech be put?--GUIGUI 21:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

If we must have a clear criterion, I think "produced by Hasbro/Takara" may be the best we can do. And yes, that would mean moving most promotional toys like Happy Meals out of "toys" and into something else. Sadly, it would also affect toys made by GiG in Italy or by Estrela in Brazil, without some sort of concession. Those were at least the same molds, so, we could base it on who owned the rights to the tooling at the time the item was produced, since GiG and Estrela were licensing them but wouldn't have owned them. (Not who made the original tooling, since then toys like Omega Supreme and Roadbuster are out.)

Hasbro owned the Bandai tooling used to filled out the line in 1985? --Rotty 21:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Whoops -- no, they didn't. Don't know why I even wrote that. So that idea's out completely then. --Steve-o 22:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Personally though I would rather not have a set rule for it, and instead decide things case by case. We could keep a list in the help pages of what items "count" as toys and what items don't. It's a subjective thing, but, I think we'll end up with the smallest number of silly categorizations that way. As Rotty says, I can't imagine any definition of the word "toy" that would exclude a Revoltech figure. They are nothing like Metalforce Prime. Metalforce is, IMO, very much in the "statue" area and not the "toy" area. A 3" Titanium is pretty much just a statue too, to me, but a SCF/HoC PVC figurine is moving closer to "toy".

--Steve-o 21:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I basically agree with Steve. The line between the two is fuzzy, but I feel that most everybody would agree with decisions, in this case, made somewhat arbitrarily. I don't think it's too hard to easily discern what was produced to be played with, and what was produced to be a display piece. --Sntint 21:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we can come up with a pretty good definition in that toys are designed to be played with. You can say of them that they have a "play pattern", as I did at Multi-property brand. So figures that transform into something else are toys. If you play with them by having them interact with vehicles and accessories, also toys. Attacktix, Built to Rule!, MyClone, Revoltech, those are also meant to be played with. There's really no way to play with 3" Titaniums, but it would be nice to keep Titanium Series entirely under Toys when the same character has both 6" and 3" figures. 3" Titaniums and SCFs are a gray area. --Rotty 21:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Notice that this "to be able to play with" distinction fall apart for softimus Prime and Optimash Prime, who are definitively done to play with. Yet, personally I would never move them in the toys Section.--GUIGUI 22:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

There's a point here, but I really think it needs to be a) signed and b) not phrased as threat of protest in order to weigh it against other opinions expressed. --Rotty 22:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I just Forgot to sign (happen from time to time, sorry) and there was absolutely no will of threat when I tipped it.--GUIGUI 22:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if Hasbro and Takara have some exact standard by which they determine what's a toy and what's merchandise? Perhaps toys tend to belong to "lines" or assortments, whereas merchandise tends to be a one-off item? There is an assortment of Titaniums, there is certainly an assortment of actual main-line figures, but there is only one Optimash Prime? Certainly we cannot strictly use the amount of "one", but perhaps this is where we can be arbitrary, if not being wholly arbitrary? There are only two Softformers, only one Metalforce... I suppose Masterpiece now has enough items to be considered a line? --Sntint 22:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Nice idea, but the Heroes of Cybertron series goes against that logic.--GUIGUI 22:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

We're currently counting Robot Heroes as Merchandise, and that line's set to get fairly extensive. SCF would also have to be switched to toys, when you really can't play with them. --Rotty 22:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Wall Statues

I went to my local Toys Be We today, looking for a Classics Bumblebee, and discovered three Classics Primes, a 20th DVD Anniversary Prime....and Megatron and Optimus Prime Wall Statues. Here and here. Pricy, but yummy-lookin'. I wish I had three hundred bucks to blow on all three...but I'll be content (for now) with my Classics Prime. If somebody wants to add the statues to the merchandise for Optimus and Megsy, go ahead. Kendrakirai 04:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Original G1 Toy

We don't seem to have a picture of the original toy. I think given its importance to the line (and its many releases) It would be great to have a good collection of pictures of it emphasising its many features and variations (ie New Years Convoy, TF Collection version with axe). Azereal 03:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

When I wrote this article, I attempted to track down as many images as I could find for all the figures I listed and described. But G1 Prime was difficult, because I wasn't sure any fan photo would be more deserving than any other for it, and I couldn't find a stock Hasbro/Takara photo of the original team was of good visual quality. I think I'll leave if for you guys to figure out, now. - FFN in class

We need a pic of this toy with its trailer and alternate modes. That's kind of a big thing to be missing there. -- Repowers 20:52, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

The encore trailer sports a 1992 mold year. Is this the G2 retool, and if so, what changes were made? Also, is there any info on trailer variants?--Hida Atarasi 01:48, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

New additions

Hi guys. I was just reading thru this AWSOME article and noticed a few more recent things were missing. I hope you like my additions. --PacifistPrime.

Thank you. I am pretty awesome at writing about toys I don't actually own :D --FFN 14:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, you certainly do a great job, because I actually do own most of them (not that I'm bragging), and I can't really better any of the descriptions in your entries. Nice work! :-)

In case you're interested, I'm a Prime/Megsy completist, at least in the sense of I buy each officially produced transforming (or at least highly articulated) mould. I'd like to think that I'm not a slave to repaints, but if they reflect something that's actually in the fiction I'll sometimes cave, ala Powerlinx Armada Prime. As a sideline I collect most iterations of Starscream, Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime, Ultra Magnus, Soundwave and Grimlock. Oh, and Beast Wars/Machines characters who were actually in the shows. All the best, PacifistPrime.

To be fair, I've not seriously edited this page since creating it in January, so the sheer majority of the work since then (especially of the new toys released since January) were written by other members, and the entire Trivia section was originally by Nevermore and somebody else who I can't remember, unfortunately. But still, I am very proud of it as toys are a sorely neglected subject on this wiki. A single sentence about toys is not good enough unless the product in question doesn't do anything. --FFN 15:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Slightly altered how?

Me again. Just a question; does anyone know what the actual difference is between the original Japanese Pepsi Convoy and the supposedly "slightly altered" U.S. release? I've just added the U.S. version here since, unlike Pepsi Convoy, he is actually supposed to be Optimus. However, I don't know what this small difference is supposed to be, since I only own the Japanese version myself.

Also, I understand that this was a convention exclusive of some variety, but was it just a BotCon thing, or was it available at ComiCon and/or anywhere else? Purchase or competition?

Any help?

Thanks, PacifistPrime

The only differences I'm aware of are the character distinction and the packaging. Oh, and I assume the US version has short stacks. (I have the Japanese one.) It was sold by Hasbro Toy Shop at BotCon and San Diego Comic-Con this year. It's something they sold at whatever convention they were at, as part of their normal stock. --ItsWalky 13:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks dude! Much appreciated. Yeah, now that you mention it, looking at the picture I added I can see the small stacks. Cheers, PacifistPrime

Snarky commentary

Who the heck put all the snarky commentary in the sections for iPod Convoy, the Nike thing, the Pepsi things ect? I actually have a good idea who did it, but I'll refrain from naming names. For the most part, this article is meant to be informative in comparison to most articles on the wiki, so we should restrain ourselves from adding colour commentary and giving "cute" nicknames for the toys. I would also advise this person to stop displaying the toy images as large as possible. --FFN 05:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear FFN,

PacifistPrime here.

I'd like to clear up a few misconceptions. I am responsible for the so-called "snarky" comments that you have unilaterally excised, however, you are incorrect in describing them as having been "put" into the relevant sections such as Nike and iPod Convoy, because I originated all those sections myself in the first place. As the original author, the tone of my writing can hardly be described as an insertion or imposition to pre-existing material, since those whole sections were my own original contributions.

Regarding the "naming of names", I don't know if I was the user you had in mind or not, but I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from making this all sound like some clandestine snarkfest: I wrote the entries whilst logged in and never made any attempt to make my contribution anonymously.

As to the "snarky commentary", with all due respect (and acknowledging you're doubtless a more frequent contributor than myself): Are you serious? One of the most pervasive and appealing things about this wiki is its sense of humour and light, joshing tone. My comments are satirical and jovial at worst, hardly snarky. I mean, honestly, you don't want us to become like the mirthless uptights over at Wookieepedia, do you?

And I challenge you to dispute that my contributions on these toys aren't thoroughly informative. I believe that my wry comments in no way detract from the article's informativeness.

Finally, if the image sizes are too large, I'm more than happy to concede that. I just made them a size which seemed adequately large to understand, but if you feel strongly otherwise, I don't much care on this point.

Rather than just reverting your edits, I'm hoping we can discuss this. I'd be good if some other users will weigh in on this matter. I hope I am not out of line here, but I really believe that FFN's appraisal of my work (and his edits) are excessive (and somewhat contrary to the flavour of this wiki), especially as they have stood intact for several months.

All the best,

PacifistPrime

The problem is not me wanting to excise humour from the wiki (if you'll noted me in talk pages and on TFW2005, I am a staunch defender of the Wiki's tone and sense of humour), the problem is the jokes got in the way of conveying information with them starting off with commentary about Prime's corporate shilling and the various nicknames you gave to the toys. In any case, the number of jokes didn't fit the tone of the rest of the article, or really, the tone of the toy sections of the rest of the wiki. Now, I really do appreciate you for writing about the Japanese toys, but really, with humour sometimes less is more.

Oh, somebody needs to find an out-of-box photo of iPod Convoy. I only have stock photos of iPod Optimus Prime. --FFN 12:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, FFN, what can I say? I disagree. I really don't think you can reasonably argue that the jokes were "getting in the way", as all the useful information was clearly there. Frankly, I think the running gag that Japanese Convoy is addicted to endorsement deals was a perfectly relevant bit of observational humour, given how obviously egregious 2007 was for this fact, and it's a damn shame to have it removed.

Does anyone else want to weigh in here?

Cheers, PacifistPrime.

I have no strong opinion on it. I think there were probably too many jokes before, but it would be okay for some of them to be put back in. I do think the "nickames" for the toys are probably a bad idea. Since we're talking about Japanese-exclusive toys that American fans won't know much about, it's probably better to call them by their real names all the time to avoid confusion. --Steve-o 23:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable to me. I can appreciate the point about the excessively cute/smartass nicknames. If I could restore the running note of observational humour about Convoy's excessive number of corporate endorsements, I'd be happy. Whaddaya reckon, FFN? Anyone else?

--PacifistPrime.

Okay, I'd just prefer it if we didn't bash people over the head with the joke like say, the The Chaser's War on Everything or something. I prefer my satire to be more subtle and be left for the viewer to notice, like Newstopia. Funnily enough I love both shows.

Edit: Sorry for not replying soon, I didn't notice this talk page had been updated since January. --FFN 06:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I take it from the Chaser reference that you're a fellow Aussie TransFan, FFN...? Anyway, I've restored the two header jokes about Japanese Prime being addicted to endorsement deals but without reinserting any of the name-based jokes, as per our discussion. (n.b. The remaining use of "iPodimus Prime" was actually still there, I didn't put it back in. I assume that means you thought one mention was okay when you were removing all the others. I'd appreciate that one use being left that way too, as I think it rolls off the toungue an is fankly pretty amusing, if I do say so myself...).

I hope that's all cool with everyone now.

Peace, --PacifistPrimePP 09:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I am. That's fine now. Could you write about the iPod Optimus Prime redeco? Yeah, his name is Optimus Prime for some reason. --FFN 20:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am probably a bit late, but i think the whole "convoy loves corporate endorsements" thing is hilarious and does not detract at all from the informative nature of the article. Just thought i would throw my opinion out there.--Skyglide 04:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Main Image

"We need a more appropriate image, one that only has G1 Primes on it."
While I agree with ItsWalky that that would be ideal, the image that was there is so filled with awesome that I vote we keep it in place until we have something better. JW 14:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Didn't Remy Rodis do one like this, with a buttillion Primes all together? Maybe you should bug him about it. -hx, still not logged in.

25th Anniversary Pack

Sooooo... what do we file the umpteenth rerelease of this toy under? Universe? Universe (2008)?--Rosicrucian^Talk 05:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Universe (2008). —Interrobang 05:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Pepsi Optimus Prime

Are we sure Pepsi Optimus Prime was Pepsi Convoy? I thought he was just Optimus Prime, not a seperate character. -Derik 03:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, they're two different dudes. Pepsi Convoy is a character separate from Optimus Prime created to shill, and Pepsi Optimus Prime is just Optimus Prime The Shill. --ItsWalky 03:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fictional apperances

I was looking through the toylist and I thought it might be interesting to have some kind of note about fictional appearances of the toys, or a "toy-only" note. It would be neat to look at the Combat Hero toy and see that it appeared at the end of the G2 comic. The note could have a range, Issues 5–7 of Marvel comics or something. Some of them, like Masterpiece don't really count as it is supposed to be the original. Just an idea. Maybe it is too messy to attempt. - Starfield 23:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Just to follow up: Hearing no objection I went ahead and added the info back then, but the recent consensus seems to be to not have it. - Starfield 16:59, 27 April 2010 (EDT)

Original toy influence

Please explain why this was cut. Is it not true? Is it somehow not relevant in some bizarro-world way that I'm not seeing? -- Repowers 19:53, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

"The first Optimus Prime toy was the inspiration for lots of Optimus Prime toys later". NO SHIT, REALLY? Should it also BE NOTED THAT? --M Sipher 19:56, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

It is also worth noting! - Chris McFeely 19:57, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

Optimus Primes in every continuity family, Ultra Magnuses, evil clones, BW leaders, even a faction sigil or two... the toy has influence that ranges across the entire history of the brand, multiple characters, universes, and franchises. It's the root of a huge family tree. This may be obvious to you and me, sure, because we are all uber-robot geeks here. But there is nothing inherently obvious about it at all. If "obvious" is our criteria, why are we describing the toy at all?

(I was gonna contrast that with all the stuff we describe that can be PLAINLY SEEN FROM PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE TOY, but strangely enough we're missing photos of his alternate mode and trailer.) -- Repowers 20:14, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

No answer? -- Repowers 11:14, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

Alternity?

Wasn't our Alternity section more expansive than this? Did we lose everything in the Bookworm Crash? --Detour 10:50, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

The Trannies?

The G2 Laser Optimus Prime section talks about "The Trannies" awards, and that the figure won twice, and also lost to its own repaint. Can anyone provide an insight to these awards? How were they decided, by whom, where, when, who won, when did they stop, etc? Presumably either on its own page or a suitable sub-section of someone else's (eg: if they were done by Hasbro, a section on the Hasbro page). 118.208.172.41 06:19, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

They were held on alt.toys.transformers (and related newsgroups) during the late 90s/early 00s, organised by Robert Jung. The awards were decided by email vote. A Google Groups search may help enlighten. --abates 06:29, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

edited out the name of the award because it's a slur. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mandoimissmst3k (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

Reverted your vandalixm. --Khajidha (talk) 05:12, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

Why is it vandalism? The word's a slur, including the nickname of a long dead award provides no necessary context and it seems tone deaf at best, actively hostile at worst -Mandoimissmst3k (talk) 08:32, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

Because the word as used here is not a slur, as it is not being used in reference to a person. It is the actual name of the award, that is all the context that is needed. --Khajidha (talk) 11:47, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

That's not how slurs work. even if no one involved in the process realized it was a slur (and, to be honest, that's pretty unlikely. That term as a slur for trans people has been used well earlier than 1996), it still reflects very poorly now. as a reference point, here's the entry on said word from GLAAD's Media Reference guide

these words dehumanize transgender people and should not be used in mainstream media. The criteria for using these derogatory terms should be the same as those applied to vulgar epithets used to target other groups: they should not be used except in a direct quote that reveals the bias of the person quoted. So that such words are not given credibility in the media, it is preferred that reporters say, "The person used a derogatory word for a transgender person." Please note that while some transgender people may use "tranny" to describe themselves, others find it extremely offensive.

I realize a wiki isn't reporting, but I personally don't consider this incredibly trivial bit of knowledge to be worth the potential pain caused to people. If it were a slur for another group, such as gay people or African Americans, would you be so nonchalant about its use? Mandoimissmst3k (talk) 16:00, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

Carbombya , Spastic , Slag

No one is saying it isn't derogatory; we're saying that was the name. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 17:25, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

If you reread your own citation, you will notice that it is talking about use of the term to describe a person. Your objection here is equivalent to saying that we shouldn't use the phrase "spick and span" because "spic" is a slur for Mexicans. --Khajidha (talk) 17:27, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

I'd argue that it's more akin to not wanting you to use the outdated, racist term for Brazil Nuts. Anyone not deeply versed in Transformers fandom is immediately going to think of the slur when they see that, whereas the phrase you cite is very widely known. Language can be a cudgel against people, and I personally don't value knowledge of an outdated fan award to be worth causing any harm. The example pages that were provided? they discuss things and point out why it's inappropriate, instead of just dropping a slur into a page about Optimus Prime's toys. I've made my argument and I'll drop it, but I also think y'all aught to be ashamed. Mandoimissmst3k (talk) 18:39, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

Speaking as a transgender person, I think the name is extremely unfortunate, but its still a piece of history. Not that I think it's really all that notable anymore, but still. Escargon (talk) 06:54, 12 September 2019 (EDT)

On further thought, I think we don't actually have to say the name at all. All due respect to Robert Jung, this isn't an unfortunate official product, it's an unfortunate fan term. I've put in new wording. --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 07:12, 14 September 2019 (EDT)

Goes somewhere

Another split?

So yeah, I'm less than halfway through this big overhaul, and I'm thinking we might need a separate page for all Prime's merchandise, just to take the load off this one. - Chris McFeely 18:36, 29 November 2009 (EST)

That seems fine to me. --ItsWalky 18:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Seems a natural split. I would also suggest that given the sheer number of toys we're detailing, the "trivia" section with development info at the bottom ought to actually have its subsections moved up to the toys they're discussing. The original toy in particular already has a lot of development info in its entry, so merging it with the other info at the bottom would be for the best.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:14, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Generations

Where is the Generations deluxe Prime on this page?TOM 20:45, 21 May 2010 (EDT)

That'd be under 'Transformers (2010)', actually. It needs a little tweaking, too; He turns into a '90s International 8100 daycab, and certainly not a racing truck. A flame job on a Civic does not a racecar make. Unfortunately, I apparently don't have enough edits yet to fix it myself. 99.192.95.58 10:29, 11 March 2011 (EST)

You should still be able to make the edit, though I'd recommend including a citation/supporting evidence link so any skeptics know you're not just making it up.--Apcog 14:01, 11 March 2011 (EST)

The page was protected some time ago because anons kept adding the Generations WFC Prime to it. Given the date of TOM's original post, that's the Prime he's asking about too. --Detour 14:19, 11 March 2011 (EST)

Ah, I see. I thought 99.192.95.58 was phrasing it that way because he was afraid his own editing record wouldn't hold enough weight and so it'd just get reverted.

In that case, 99.192.95.58, you have to register first, and then you can edit the page. It isn't contingent on how many edits you've made in the past. (That's mainly for adding funny captions.)--Apcog 17:25, 11 March 2011 (EST)

Pepsi Prime

Crazysteve, fount of robot wisdom, found photos and ads advertising Pepsi Prime. Apparently he wasn't a mail-away, he was a contest promotion (at least initially.) If your Specially Marked Can of Pepsi had "WIN" under the tab, you took the tab to a Pepsi bottler and they gave you a Prime. Huh. -hx 09:14, 15 November 2010 (EST)

Another another split?

This page is currently the third longest non-MSTF page on the wiki, should it be split? And if so, how? Toyline? Years? We've never had to deal with this problem before, a little discussion seems in order. --Khajidha 08:23, 3 March 2011 (EST)

I don't see any point in further splitting. —Interrobang 14:27, 11 March 2011 (EST)

Transformers 2010/Reveal The Shield

The G2 remake Prime was shipped (in the UK at least and I'm sure elsewhere) under the Reveal The Shield branding, this was on the card and the figure features the rubsign which is the token feature of the line. I'm not sure 'Transformers 2010' is the best title for the section.

It might also be worth mentioning the matrix gimmick. The inside of the side windows are molded with a (non removable) matrix relief. In robot mode, this is visible through the windshield/chest. Iyato 19:49, 12 March 2011 (EST)

Reveal the Shield is just a subline imprint, no different than previous examples like AllSpark Power or the Unicron Battles. In those cases we use the main franchise name for the section, not the subline. The only reason this seems weird here is because there isn't a distinctive franchise name here. --Khajidha 14:06, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

Ah. Fair enough, thanks for clarifying. Will add a short line about the matrix gimmick, any objections, please discuss. Iyato 16:08, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

I just checked over his instructions and the head doesn't look like the toy's (i.e no mouthplate). As per the trend of different looking head's in instructions, I'd like to ask what it may be if there is to be a not yet announced retool. Everyone place your bets. --Ninjabot33 14:06, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

Thunderclash is my bet. Have read (on Seibertron.com I think) that we won't see another RTS wave until the TF3 toy rush is over. Iyato 17:00, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

((Yet) Another) G1 Retool?

Can someone confirm that Encore Prime uses the G2 retool (backpack)? Or that the BAPE release uses the Chronicles retool (trailer post)? I think it's worth chronicling the evolution of the mold itself, step by step, along with copyrights and stuff. Hida Atarasi 21:29, 9 October 2011 (EDT)

Powermaster Rerelease?

I might have accidentally skipped it, but was there a rerelease of Powermaster Optimus Prime? If not, did I SERIOUSLY just skip over an MISB PMOP for $50 at Nekocon? --King Starscream 17:59, 7 November 2011 (EST)

Powermaster Optimus Prime (with Apex Armor) was one of the first Toys R Us G1 reissue exclusives. --ItsWalky 18:39, 7 November 2011 (EST)

Masterpiece Prime

On the first Prime Masterpiece figure, one of his communicators has Starscream on the screen. has he sent Roller to the Decepticon base so that he could spy on them, or something? --66.82.9.57 18:01, 18 November 2011 (EST)

Well probably no Convoy278 (talk) 01:46, 11 October 2014 (EDT)

2010 Sons of Cybertron

Is there any reason this and other figures aren't being put into their own toyline rather than just shoved in G1? I mean they seem so out of place with the rest of the figures on those sections.--BlackStarscream 18:32, 29 April 2012 (EDT)

Mail away 1986 movie edition.

I have a 1986 mail away movie edition optimus prime, still in the cardboard box it was mailed in, the article said it is considered rare. I was wondering if anyone knows the value on this optimus. If anyone sees this and has any info please email me @ lclemley@comcast.net.

nice how did you get it :O Convoy278 (talk) 01:43, 11 October 2014 (EDT)

Generation 2

Somehow in the trillions of times I have come to this page I never noticed this sentence, "The traditionally dark blue internal components of the trailer are a lighter blue, as is Roller," My G2 Optimus (personally purchased off the shelf of TRU) has all dark blue internal components and a dark blue Roller. I don't remember if I bought him early on in G2 or later, but does anyone have any insight here? EShadowP 17:59, 5 January 2013 (EST)

Nevermind. Figured it out. Adding it to the entry. EShadowP 16:59, 6 January 2013 (EST)

20th Anniversary Optimus Prime/Masterpiece MP-01 Convoy

Contrary to what the article currently claims, Takara's version came out first. Remy got his by December 11, 2003, which would place the official Japanese release date somewhere around that time (Binaltech Lambor was officially released on December 12). Remy had 20th Anniversary Optimus Prime by January 9, 2004, making this the earliest confirmed date regarding the toy's availability in Hong Kong. Big Bad Toy Store received their shipment ahead of schedule on December 29, 2003, and Seibertron reported the first brick and mortar sighting on US soil on February 2, 2004.--Nevermore 01:49, 23 January 2013 (EST)

Generations Orion Pax's axe peg-ability

After seeing OptiMagnus's addition to the article, I decided to give it a looksee on mine. The Ion blaster (or indeed any 5mm-pegged accessory) can plug into it, there's a groove in the larger blade of the axe, close to the shaft, that forms three quarters of a 5mm-accomodating slot. I have no idea if its presence is deliberate, accidental, what purpose it might've been meant to serve or even if it's worth mentionning on the article proper... but it's there. --Detour (talk) 02:39, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

I think it may be intended for storage in robot mode. In addition to the blaster pegging into the axe, the axe itself can also be loosely stored behind his back by sliding the handle down between the wheels on his back (either intentionally or unintentionally designed). Combining both of these "features" gives you storage for both weapons in robot mode. OptiMagnus (talk) 02:56, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

FJ Cruiser X Transformers FJ Optimus Prime

I have noticed that FJ Optimus Prime is missing from the Wiki. As I can't read the bio I'm not 100% sure he is a G1 Prime, but if he is he should be added here. DELTAprime (talk) 23:58, 4 July 2014 (EDT)

Another another split? (II)

21:54 (cur | prev) . . (+235)‎ . . Mimi (Talk | contribs) (Maybe this page should be split up...)

I fully agree (it came up above, but Interrobang shut it down), the problem is... how? Move the many reissues and repaints of the original toy (and possibly reissues of other toys too) to a new [sub]subpage, linked from below the mould's first release?

[Should probably split out the toys/merch of Optimus Prime (WFC) as well...] - SanityOrMadness (talk) 18:40, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

I would just pick an arbitrary year to split and go from there. I think 75%/25% ratio would work since there will inevitably be more toys. Mimi (talk) 19:08, 8 August 2014 (EDT)

2012 Commemorative Series

I'm looking at the cabs for the 2012 reissues of both Optimus Prime and Ultra Magnus. They both seem to have an altered hitch which now has a hole their weapons can plug into. I don't have the 25th anniversary Prime but from online pics, it doesn't seem to have this change. Does anyone know which version of the cab did or is this a new addition? Also it seems that while the trailer is the same bright grey of the 25th anniversary Prime, his cab is back to the darker red and blue though again, I can't confirm. Riddlerj (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2015 (EDT)

• Nevermind, I found it. It appears to be the Chronicle remold that came with Movie Optimus Prime. Probably why the trailer is from the 25th set.Riddlerj (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2015 (EDT)

Should we add Optimal Optimus to this article, too?

If we go by what the show depicts, Optimal Optimus is created when Primal takes in G1 Prime's Spark. So does that technically qualify Optimal Optimus as being a toy of G1 Optimus? Even the toy bio says that exposure to a "nebulous entity" (a basic way to describe a Spark) created Optimal Optimus. I think Optimal Optimus should go on this page, but I may as well post here so as to avoid looking like a tool. What do you guys think? MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 11:41, 10 December 2015 (EST)

No. --Giggidy (talk) 11:55, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Not remotely. Optimus Prime's spark is an unconscious passenger in Optimus Primal's body, which is reformatted to contain it. We're not going to put every Transformer Starscream's ghost possessed on Starscream's page. - Chris McFeely (talk) 11:56, 10 December 2015 (EST)

This is technically a different situation to that, though; Starscream's ghost didn't create a whole new body for his host(s), he simply took control of it/them. Optimal Optimus is a body that was created by Optimus Prime's Spark being in the same body as Optimus Primal's, which presumably meant that holding Prime's Spark had something to do with the Optimal Optimus upgrade in the first place (in-fiction, of course). By itself, it's not entirely notable. But given the context of the fiction it's presented in, I think it might be considered acceptable to have the toy on both Primal's page and Prime's page. To quote our very article on Optimal Situation (emphasis mine);

"Blackarachnia and Silverbolt activate the Ark's repair systems to help stabilize Optimus Prime's condition, but the Autobot leader is still dying, and "reality is still in flux". The other Maximals arrive, and upon seeing Prime, realize that they must save him. However, his spark is fading. Believing there is no other choice, Optimus Primal merges his spark with Prime's to save it. He succeeds, and Rhinox summons an Autobot repair device to begin restoring Prime's body. Holding Prime's spark causes Primal to expand into a new, larger body."

Holding Optimus Prime's Spark is what causes Optimus Primal to gain the Optimal Optimus body, and from the time he gets it to the time he returns it, he gets both a new flanging effect and a deeper voice; and the deeper voice dissapears after Optimal Situation, IIRC. So Prime's Spark almost definitely played some part in the Optimal upgrade; Primal even directly orders the Maximals to "transform and roll out" when he'd never done so before or afterwards; it's only when he has Prime's spark that he says it, so it's entirely possible that the two were sharing the body in some capacity. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2015 (EST)

All that seems rather like what happens to Hot Rod when he becomes Rodimus Prime, and we don't put Rodimus's toys on the pages of all previous Matrix holders. --Khajidha (talk) 12:54, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Well, because it's pretty obvious that passing the Matrix =/= sharing a body in the strictest sense. This is one character (Primal, in this case) sharing a body with the Spark of another (Optimus Prime) that causes an upgrade, not the passing of a sacred implement from one person to another person (as in Hot Rod becoming Rodimus Prime when the Matrix is passed to him). MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 12:58, 10 December 2015 (EST)

You are SERIOUSLY overthinking all of this. --Khajidha (talk) 13:01, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Maybe, but discussion about these sorts of overthinking topics is better than making the edit, having it reverted and then starting the talk discussion. Makes for a more calm atmosphere for clean discussion, which is good for productivity. I'm finding it rather nice to have this sort of discussion.

And besides, if we don't have discussions about these sorts of irrelevant topics, what type of fan-wiki would we be? :p It's almost like a fan-wiki tradition to have people bring up utterly irrelevant topics just to discuss them. MaximalBroadjaw (talk) 13:43, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Titans Return Leader

I left a message on Walky's page but no dice. I'm trying to do a little research on Prime's new Powermaster form and a couple of his features are said variously to work okay, poorly, or not at all. In particular, mounting one of his guns on his chest plate in base mode - I'm able to do it just fine, other are saying it either damaged the paint, pops off, or that it flat out won't peg in. Anyone else have any insight into why this might be, or how their particular unit is faring? --King Starscream (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2016 (EDT)

Orion Pax

Given the number of Orion Pax toys out or currently pending, can we consider ways to make them easier to locate? Right now the best I can do is CTRL+F for "Orion Pax" here. Maybe a separate Orion Pax (G1)/Toys page? Keep everything currently on this page here, but duplicate the Orion toys onto a sub-page, linked to at the top? Thoughts? --Xaaron (talk) 14:12, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

Optimus Prime (G1)/Orion Pax toys? Alternatively Optimus Prime (G1)/toys/Orion Pax. We do need to split up this page somewhere, since it's gigantic. Saix (talk) 15:17, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

I was thinking we could take all the promotional Primes (Pepsi Optimus, BAPE, ect) and move them to a "Promotional" page. It would make it shorter, at the least. NewtypeS3 (talk) 17:17, 25 October 2017 (EDT)

Power of the Primes Optimus

Normally I'd change this myself, but since one of the captions also plays into this, I figured I'd bring it up here. The description for this figure notes that Optimus "transforms from a smokestack-less truck with a trailer into a robot and back." In point of fact, the truck does have smokestacks. They're stubby and red, but they're part of the hinge that connects Orion's shoulder ball joints. There's even sculpted detail for the smokestack's heat shields. I just removed this mention from the description, but the caption for the Optimus combined mode makes the smokestacks the punchline. That should probably change, too. pjdonnell (talk) 03:52, 6 February 2018 (EST)

OK, I didn't notice it since I first saw the stock renders. Sorry. FigureGunplaFan (talk) 05:04, 6 February 2018 (EST)

Star Convoy (mis)assembly confusion

"The joint piece that connects the star-shaped piece is (presumably) misassembled: The joint's cavity is supposed to face backwards. This is actually the correct position, as flipping the piece only increases the issue of connecting the star piece firmly. " I'm not sure I understand what is being said here. Which way does the piece actually face? Which way is it supposed to face? The way it is written seems to be saying 1) that we think the current assembly is wrong, 2) that the current assembly actually is wrong, and 3) that the current assembly is right. ALL AT THE SAME TIME. --Khajidha (talk) 09:21, 16 October 2019 (EDT)

"Sigh" removed for now. FigureGunplaFan (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2019 (EDT)

POTP Evolution Optimus Prime

While reading through the page, the section for the Power of the Primes Leader-class figure made me stop and examine it more closely. The claim that "many details" including a "nearly identical" head sculpt to the MP-10 Masterpiece toy is incredibly dubious. A simple side-by-side of the example pictures shows that isn't true, especially about the heads which are not very similar sculpts at all. While it's likely that the POTP figure took some inspiration from the MP-10 figure, the former does not appear to have any parts taken directly from the latter, and really, it's likely because both figures are trying to be as Optimus Prime as possible. I don't own either figure, but it's pretty easy to see this is inaccurate. If someone who does own the figure could rewrite that section, it would be appreciated.

G2 Hero Variation

My G2 Hero Optimus Prime seems to be a variation not mentioned here or on TFU.info. It lacks the hole for the blue gun to mount on the rocket launcher in truck mode. I compared it to my Destructicon Scourge, which does have this hole, and it is indeed a mold variation. I'm guessing mine was an early release, and subsequent releases included the hole. Mine also has a molded gear, that feels as if you could turn it to make something extend/retract (kinda like G1 Perceptor's head) but it is just molded into the blue launcher part and is not an actual gear. Perhaps at some point the designers were going to make something extend/retract, but then decided not to. Mine has no place to store the gun in truck mode. Should we add this variation to the G2 Hero entry?

Earthrise Optimus Prime

Sideswipe's jetpack, while looking like it would fit on Optimus's back, does not actually fit cleanly and properly onto the block on Optimus' back. The hinge of the block is thicker than the rest of the block and prevents this unless you force it in.

Robosen Optimus Prime

Christ on a Tilt-a-Whirl, that writeup is... it's beyond too much. It takes up my entire fullscreen browser window on the extra-wide gaming monitor with almost nothing but text. The eye completely slides off. I don't know enough about the thing to properly go through it, but certainly SOME of this can be chainsawed away, or at least condensed. --M Sipher (talk) 06:09, 7 July 2023 (EDT)

'84 toy cab-over Alt mode identity change

I'm very late to this boat, but last I saw, and for the longest time, Optimus' original alt mode (and all other toys of different characters based on it) was listed as a Freightliner FL86 cabover. It's now a Freightliner WFT-8664T.

This isn't to cast doubt or anything, but I'm genuinely curious as to why this changed and/ or how it was determined.

Are they variations of the same model? Banannixx (talk) 01:49, 6 November 2023 (EST)