Talk:Skyfall (G1)

Having discovered this entry, I have to say the first image has my all-time favorite caption on the whole Wiki. --Rotty 00:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Needs Neutrality

Our policiy is to have the upper character blurb be continuity neutral. While I know we're all LSotW fans, I do not like the characterisation of Skyfal as a scheeming jerk in "Bullets" overriding the bio he's had for the last 20 years, which describes him as a basically a tallented, daydreaming kid. The IDW personality should be kept to that section I think. --76.28.76.206 08:41, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

It's not that "we're LS fans," it's that an actual starring in-story role is going to take precedence over 150-word cardcopy blurb from 20 years ago. Keeping the old intro requires willfully ignoring Skyfall's entire in-fiction existence, and thus forgoes "neutrality" for a willful ignorance. We split the difference in cases like Blaster and Galvatron, where there are like 5 different thoroughly-crafted stories. We don't split the difference with Optimus Primal actually being a new body for Optimus Prime. I'm putting it back. --Thylacine 2000 09:13, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

For 20 YEARS he was a KID who daydreamed constantly about flying, was smart and earnest and a great weapons designer, why should one text story (well written or not) take precidence and wipe out who he was for two decades and 99% of his existance. I think our policy of neutrality serves the characte FAR better. I say keep it to the IDW section, as in Blaster's case. --76.28.76.206 09:17, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

He was not a kid for 20 years. His original tech spec bio says absolutely nothing about his age, just that he's a day-dreamer. (I can think of two other Autobot daydreamers, Skids and Slapdash, who are also not "The Kid.") It's only his Dreamwave MTMTE profile which says that he's young. And being young doesn't preclude you from being a jerk, anyway. --ItsWalky 09:47, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

To add on the pile, he wasn't smart for 20 years, either. He had an intelligence of six. "Talented young dreamer" and "great intelligence" weren't words that applied to him until 2003. --ItsWalky 09:52, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Blaster's case only applies because there is divergent STORY MATERIAL. Skyfall simply never appeared in any fiction before. There's a big difference. We never give such absolute deference to the techspecs and it does a disservice to our readers to exempt from Skyfall's character profile the entirety of all characterization he has ever received. "For 20 years, Skyfall was"--nothing at all. But rather than get into a revert war, I will invite others here to give their opinions. --Thylacine 2000 09:26, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

I agree with Thylacine. Skyfall was just an obscure character given development. I think that development should stay, rather than a toy bio. It'd just confuse people who only know him from the recent story. It's not the same for Blaster; there are two prominent pieces of fiction that portray him differently. Maybe we could add a note mentioning that his portrayal was different. --NCZ 09:30, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

I'd have to agree with Thy, for the reasons he outlined above. Perhaps a little less heavy handed than it was written before, but there should be implications in the intro that all is not as it seems.--Khajidha 09:32, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

I still strongly disagree with this prioratizing, but I'll bow to the crowd. I do think taking this route necessitates adding toy bio and MTMTE bio entries to his fiction section. To make the different "takes" on the character clear--76.28.76.206 10:19, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Except all his toy bio says about him is "he turns into anything, he used to be a jet fighter and he daydreams about flying". --Detour 10:32, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Ironfist's Message?

Okay, I made a correction earlier about how Ironfist's message reached Skyfall LONG after Ironfist had died, whereas the current revision implies that Skyfall received the message at the very MOMENT he died.

The timeline doesn't add up then. The Skyfall scene takes place Nine Months Later, as is stated in the text. That would imply that the events of LSOTW happened roughly eight and change months ago.

If Ironfist had "just" died, that means the main events of LSOTW occurred over a span of months, which simply cannot be the case. Even factoring in the travel time to and fro Garrus-9, it doesn't add up. And the fact of the matter is that the main events of LSOTW takes place over the same span of time as the first arc of the ongoing, which certainly doesn't seem to occur over months.

I was under the assumption, and the text seems to confirm, that Ironfist's "impact trigger" sent a message to his workstation when he died, but the workstation didn't receive it for months, because as Ironfist himself states "I suppose it depends on how far away I am when you kill me" in regards to when the message will arrive.

The way I read it, Ironfist died on the way home from Garrus-9, but the impact trigger signal didn't reach the workstation for eight or so months.

If Ironfist had "just" died, then Skyfall wouldn't have to worry about the possibility that Springer or the survivors were told of his misdeeds, because Springer would have been lying half-dead on the return flight at that moment as well!

So this is how I see it. Am I missing something? --Nu-Priest 12:44, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

LSOTW #1 indicated at least an eight month gap between when the newbies were picked up at Igue Moor and when Impactor was discovered. Springer also said travel time was up drastically because the Space Bridges were down. Yeah, it's kinda boring to think they just sat on Magnus's ship for 8-9 months on their way to Garrus-9, but that's what the story said. --Xaaron 12:59, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Okay, that makes slightly more sense, it's just odd then...seems like everything was put on hold for eight months, the new Wreckers getting to know each other...and Ultra Magnus goes to and from Earth fairly fast then, doesn't he? --Nu-Priest 13:27, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

He said his ship (the one Rodimus ended up stealing) was phenomenally faster than the one the Wreckers were using -- but it was only large enough for him and Verity. --Xaaron 14:32, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Tech specs bio

Could the line about transforming from anything into anything be similar to Transformium from AoE? Bass X0 (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2015 (EDT)

I'm not sure how that'd be possibly relevant, 25 years later. --ItsWalky (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2015 (EDT)

Cancelled Botcon 2017 Exclusive

Given that Pete's Robot Convention is showing off what would have been the BotCon 2017 set and a Skyfall figure is amongs it do we want to add it to this page or should it belong somewhere else? Ezim93 (talk) 23:13, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

If we were to add it in anywhere, it would most likely go into the Notes section. It's not a "canceled" figure as "canceled" implies that it ever had a chance of officially happening at all. The "BotCon 2017" figures that Pete is going to unveil are ideas that would have happened only if the license hadn't expired before the figures could have gotten the chance to get approved by Hasbro. But they never got that chance, nor even got past the point of conception. Thus, they fall more into the same category as unofficial fan customs, albeit ones conceived by formerly-official people. --Sabrblade (talk) 23:33, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

We'd treat it the same as the other proposed toys on the BotCon page, so it's not quite in the same category as unofficial fan customs. --abates (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2017 (EDT)